Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38857265›Full record

ArticlePLOS global public health2024

Advancing equitable access to digital mental health in the Asia-Pacific region in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond: A modified Delphi consensus study.

Jill K Murphy, Shirley Saker, Promit Ananyo Chakraborty, Yuen Mei Michelle Chan, Erin E Michalak, Matias Irrarazaval, Mellissa Withers, Chee H Ng, Amna Khan, Andrew Greenshaw and 12 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS global public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Policy recommendations for overdose response hotlines and applications as a harm reduction tool: A commentary.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2026
    Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

22 authors.

Jill K MurphyDepartment of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8613-4429
Shirley SakerDepartment of Population and Public Health Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, United States of America.
Promit Ananyo ChakrabortySchool of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Yuen Mei Michelle ChanSchool of Nursing, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-1187-8540
Erin E MichalakDepartment of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Matias IrrarazavalPan American Health Organization, Santiago, Chile.
Mellissa WithersDepartment of Population and Public Health Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, United States of America.
Chee H NgDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Amna KhanDepartment of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Andrew GreenshawDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
John O'NeilFaculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia.
Vu Cong NguyenInstitute of Population, Health and Development, Hanoi, Vietnam.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4486-4535
Harry MinasCentre for Mental Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1719-7367
Arun RavindranCentre for Addiction and Mental Health/ Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Angela ParicCentre for Addiction and Mental Health/ Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Jun ChenShanghai Mental Health Centre, Shanghai, China.
Xing WangShanghai Mental Health Centre, Shanghai, China.
Tae-Yeon HwangKorea Foundation for Suicide Prevention, Seoul, South Korea.
Nurashikin IbrahimMental Health, Injury and Violence Prevention and Substance Abuse Sector Section, Ministry of Health, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Simon HatcherDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3117-2350
Vanessa EvansDepartment of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Raymond W LamDepartment of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic had an unprecedented impact on global mental health and well-being, including across the Asia-Pacific. Efforts to mitigate virus spread led to far-reaching disruption in the delivery of health and social services. In response, there was a rapid shift to the use of digital mental health (DMH) approaches. Though these technologies helped to improve access to care for many, there was also substantial risk of access barriers leading to increased inequities in access to mental health care, particularly among at-risk and equity-deserving populations. The objective of this study was to conduct a needs assessment and identify priorities related to equitable DMH access among at-risk and equity-deserving populations in the Asia Pacific region during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. The study consisted of a modified Delphi consensus methodology including two rounds of online surveys and online consultations with stakeholders from across the region. Study participants included policy makers, clinicians and service providers, and people with lived experience of mental health conditions. Results demonstrate that vulnerabilities to negative mental health impacts and access barriers were compounded during the pandemic. Access barriers included a lack of linguistically and culturally appropriate DMH options, low mental health literacy and poor access to technological infrastructure and devices, low levels of awareness and trust of DMH options, and lack of policies and guidelines to support effective and equitable delivery of DMH. Recommendations to improve equitable access include ensuring that diverse people with lived experience are engaged in research, co-design and policy development, the development and implementation of evidence-based and equity-informed guidelines and frameworks, clear communication about DMH evidence and availability, and the integration of DMH into broader health systems. Study results can inform the development and implementation of equitable DMH as its use becomes more widespread across health systems.

Identifiers

PMID38857265
PMCPMC11164385

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.