Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37971790›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2023

Examining the Feasibility of Implementing Digital Mental Health Innovations Into Hospitals to Support Youth in Suicide Crisis: Interview Study With Young People and Health Professionals.

Demee Rheinberger, Rachel Baffsky, Lauren McGillivray, Isabel Zbukvic, Ann Dadich, Mark Erik Larsen, Ping-I Lin, Daniel Z Q Gan, Catherine Kaplun, Holly C Wilcox and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Reducing the 'Silence Between Sessions': A Qualitative Study on Youth and Professionals' Perspectives on Digital Tools for Suicide Prevention.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Demee RheinbergerBlack Dog Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4493-8565
Rachel BaffskyBlack Dog Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7679-0617
Lauren McGillivrayBlack Dog Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9022-0274
Isabel ZbukvicOrygen, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6816-1199
Ann DadichSchool of Business, Western Sydney University, Parramatta, NSW, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5767-1794
Mark Erik LarsenBlack Dog Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0272-2053
Ping-I LinNeuroscience Research Australia, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9739-7184
Daniel Z Q GanBlack Dog Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3788-5848
Catherine KaplunTransforming Early Education and Child Health (TeEACH) Research Centre, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8601-3587
Holly C WilcoxDepartment of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2624-0654
Valsamma EapenNeuroscience Research Australia, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6296-8306
Paul M MiddletonSouth Western Sydney Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0760-1098
Michelle TorokBlack Dog Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3741-8075
Black Dog Institute · AUUNSW Sydney · AUIngham Institute · AUJohns Hopkins University · USLiverpool Hospital · AUThe University of Melbourne · AUWestern Sydney University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHospitals are insufficiently resourced to appropriately support young people who present with suicidal crises. Digital mental health innovations have the potential to provide cost-effective models of care to address this service gap and improve care experiences for young people. However, little is currently known about whether digital innovations are feasible to integrate into complex hospital settings or how they should be introduced for sustainability.

objectiveThis qualitative study explored the potential benefits, barriers, and collective action required for integrating digital therapeutics for the management of suicidal distress in youth into routine hospital practice. Addressing these knowledge gaps is a critical first step in designing digital innovations and implementation strategies that enable uptake and integration.

methodsWe conducted a series of semistructured interviews with young people who had presented to an Australian hospital for a suicide crisis in the previous 12 months and hospital staff who interacted with these young people. Participants were recruited from the community nationally via social media advertisements on the web. Interviews were conducted individually, and participants were reimbursed for their time. Using the Normalization Process Theory framework, we developed an interview guide to clarify the processes and conditions that influence whether and how an innovation becomes part of routine practice in complex health systems.

resultsAnalysis of 29 interviews (n=17, 59% young people and n=12, 41% hospital staff) yielded 4 themes that were mapped onto 3 Normalization Process Theory constructs related to coherence building, cognitive participation, and collective action. Overall, digital innovations were seen as a beneficial complement to but not a substitute for in-person clinical services. The timing of delivery was important, with the agreement that digital therapeutics could be provided to patients while they were waiting to be assessed or shortly before discharge. Staff training to increase digital literacy was considered key to implementation, but there were mixed views on the level of staff assistance needed to support young people in engaging with digital innovations. Improving access to technological devices and internet connectivity, increasing staff motivation to facilitate the use of the digital therapeutic, and allowing patients autonomy over the use of the digital therapeutic were identified as other factors critical to integration.

conclusionsIntegrating digital innovations into current models of patient care for young people presenting to hospital in acute suicide crises is challenging because of several existing resource, logistical, and technical barriers. Scoping the appropriateness of new innovations with relevant key stakeholders as early as possible in the development process should be prioritized as the best opportunity to preemptively identify and address barriers to implementation.

Indexed as

digital healthhospitalsmental healthmHealthmobile healthmobile phoneself-harmsuicide preventionyoung people

Identifiers

PMID37971790
PMCPMC10690533
OpenAlexW4387574601

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.