ArticleFrontiers in digital health2026
AI-driven mental health decision support linked to clinician resilience and preparedness.
Article in Frontiers in digital health, 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.
- Large Language Models as a New Tool for Therapists in Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy: Blinded Clinician Rating Pilot Experiment.JMIR mental health · 2026Article
- Integrating Artificial Intelligence into Psychological Counseling: A Narrative Review and Governance Framework.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingReview
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
Objectives: Mental health services are facing unprecedented demand, placing significant pressure on clinicians to conduct timely and effective patient assessments. Rising staff turnover and burnout threatens service quality across many countries. This study examined whether providing clinical information, collected via an artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled decision support tool for mental health assessments in the UK's National Health Service (NHS), was associated with differences in clinician wellbeing and patient assessment performance. Method: In this observational study, we surveyed mental health clinicians ( Results: Relative to traditional methods, assessments supported by information provided by the AI tool were associated with significantly higher clinician wellbeing and task performance, and significantly lower cognitive load, irrespective of the clinician's experience. These associations were magnified by workload. Conclusion: These findings provide preliminary evidence that AI-powered pre-assessment tools may be associated with differences in clinician experience including higher wellbeing, higher task performance, and lower cognitive burden. By targeting systemic drivers of burnout, such tools may represent a potentially scalable approach to support workforce sustainability and service quality in mental health care.
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.