ArticleBMC health services research2025
When do health and social care practitioners consider digital healthcare to be 'good care' for people with co-occurring alcohol-use disorder and depression? a qualitative analysis of practitioners' accounts.
Article in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPeople with alcohol-use disorder (AUD) and depression may experience a range of barriers to accessing formal healthcare; utilising digital technologies has been proposed as one way to improve provision for this population. The COVID-19 pandemic rapidly expanded the use of digital health in mental health and substance use services, which had previously been slow to implement telemedicine or m-health approaches. This study aimed to explore when health and social care practitioners, who work with people with AUD and depression, consider digital healthcare, in particular telemedicine and m-health to be ‘good care’. The work has implications for the development and implementation of digital healthcare for this population.
methodsA qualitative study was carried out using semi-structured interviews with 26 health and social care practitioners in the North-East and North Cumbria area of England, UK, who work with people with AUD and depression. Purposive and snowballing sampling approaches were adopted. Data were analysed inductively using thematic analysis and then framed using concepts from Ethics of Care Theory, principally, Tronto and Fisher’s four phases and ethical elements of ‘good care’.
resultsThemes were grouped into the four phases/ elements of care: Attentiveness (digital exclusion / inclusion, safety); Responsibility (in addition to a wider infrastructure of in-person support); Competence (embodiment and physicality, flexible and adaptable); and Responsiveness (honesty, and motivation). The findings also highlighted the importance of considering the relational contexts of people with AUD and depression.
conclusionsThere are some areas where practitioners perceive that digital healthcare can be valuable for people with AUD and depression. For example, it can be more flexible than current provision, it can be inclusive for some people, and it can offer a level of anonymity. However, for digital healthcare to be considered to provide good care, there should be attentiveness to people’s material and relational circumstances, and their levels of digital literacy, to ensure inequalities in this population are not exacerbated.; it should always be part of a wider package of in-person relational support. Attention should always be given to safety features and planning.
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.