ArticleProceedings of the ACM on human-computer interaction2024
Improving Collaborative Management of Multiple Mental and Physical Health Conditions: A Qualitative Inquiry into Designing Technology-Enabled Services for Eliciting Patients' Values.
Article in Proceedings of the ACM on human-computer interaction, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- "Helpful in Thinking Through the Question": Redesigning the Patient Health Questionnaire-8 for Depression Assessment to Enhance Patient Engagement and Understanding.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- Designing Values Elicitation Technologies for Mental Health and Chronic Care Integration: User-Centered Design Approach.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
People with multiple chronic conditions (MCC) face challenges planning health care collaboratively with primary care clinicians, particularly when their priorities conflict. These challenges intensify with symptoms of anxiety or depression. Elicitation of patients' values is promoted as a means to aligning patient and clinician priorities in primary care, and as a component of psychotherapy for anxiety and depression. But, these approaches remain siloed. We conducted a qualitative interview study to understand patients' preferences for Technology Enabled Services (TESs) to coordinate values elicitation across primary and mental health care settings. Many participants preferred face-to-face elicitation by a mental health clinician; some preferred elicitation via telehealth and some preferred self-directed elicitation. Participants' preferences were influenced by: 1) how they perceived the rationale and benefits of values elicitation; 2) how they perceived the training and credibility of people facilitating elicitation; and 3) how they perceived their own capacity to engage in values elicitation. Participants also shared numerous concerns about values elicitation that warrant critical examination of TESs to support it.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.