Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40650836›Full record

ArticleCommunity mental health journal2025

Productivity Billing in Mental Health Agencies: Ethical Considerations.

Travis Ray, Kristin Harris, Cassandra A Bailey

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Community mental health journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Travis RayGraduate School of Professional Psychology, University of Denver, Denver, CO, USA.
Kristin HarrisSchool of Psychology, Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, FL, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5014-8404
Cassandra A BaileyDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Metropolitan State University of Denver, Campus Box 54, PO Box 173362, Denver, CO, 80217, USA. cbaile43@msudenver.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-9326-3931

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An unavoidable piece of the American healthcare system that is often overlooked concerns billing and payment in community mental health agencies. Practitioners are faced with ethical dilemmas surrounding productivity billing that require their ability to strike a delicate balance between efficiency and providing quality care. In line with the American Psychological Association's Ethical Principals of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (2017), this paper examines ethical issues for mental health agencies and managers employing productivity-driven billing practices and reviews the impact these models have on practitioners and their clients. More specifically, it will speak to ethical concerns that impact not only the practitioners who are working at these agencies, but also the clients who are directly affected by the implementation and structure of this model. We conclude with a discussion regarding how agencies can play a more significant role in reducing unethical practices by improving operational standards to maximize quality care.

Indexed as

Community Mental Health ServicesEfficiency, OrganizationalHumansQuality of Health CareUnited StatesBilling PracticesCommunity Mental HealthEthicsProductivity BillingQuality Care

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.