ArticleCommunity mental health journal2026
The Technology Use Survey: An Actionable Digital Literacy Assessment that Matches Clients to Training Resources.
Article in Community mental health journal, 2026. 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.
- A pre-post pilot feasibility study of the MindBia web-based nutrition intervention for individuals with severe mental illness: Study protocol.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Barriers to Digital Health Utilization and Equity Among a Community Cohort of Adults with HIV in New York City.AIDS and behavior · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Digital literacy, the ability of an individual to use and interact with technology, is increasingly recognized as a social determinant of health, especially for accessing healthcare today. Despite the proliferation of digital health tools, a digital divide remains concerning the ability of everyone to benefit from these digital resources, disproportionately impacting individuals with serious mental illnesses. Many existing digital literacy assessments, such as e-HEALS, SPIDER, and DHLS, identify gaps in digital literacy but do not offer actionable steps to address them. To bridge this divide, we developed the Technology Use Survey and Matching Guide, an actionable tool designed to assess digital literacy and align individuals' needs with tailored training resources through the Digital Outreach for Obtaining Resources and Skills program. Piloted with diverse populations, including individuals in inpatient psychiatric units, community health centers, and mental health clubhouses, this new scale and matching tool were able to identify knowledge gaps, address learning barriers, and enhance digital health engagement. Case studies demonstrate how targeted interventions improved functional outcomes and access to healthcare. By merging assessment with actionable education, our framework promotes digital equity and allows all individuals to engage meaningfully with technology. Future research will refine these tools and evaluate long-term outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40921981What 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.