Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42377669›Full record

ReviewCurrent psychiatry reports2026

Is Technology Remaking Therapy: The Screen and the Self: Telepsychiatry, AI Therapy, and the Defense Against Intimacy.

Nauphyll Zuberi, Carolyn B Ringel

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current psychiatry reports, 2026. 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

2 authors.

Nauphyll ZuberiOregon Health Sciences University, Portland, OR, USA.
Carolyn B RingelCenter for Bioethics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. carolynringel1@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThis paper examines several methods of technology that have challenged traditional expectations of the meaning of psychotherapy, from the widespread adoption of telepsychiatry to the subsequent emergence of AI-driven therapeutic agents (Therabots). RECENT

findingsWidespread usage of new technology that impacts the therapeutic process has outpaced an analysis of how that technology might affect the meaning and effectiveness of that process. Lawsuits assume such technology causes harm, while limited data and the literature has been more mixed. From Frankenstein to CRISPR, new technology always has its cheerleaders and its detractors. The more the technology seems to impact a topic especially connected to our humanity, the deeper the convictions will be on both sides. Certainly, when it comes to psychotherapy, the introduction of new technologies such as telepsychiatry to Therabots has provoked discussion. We argue that while new technologies offer practical advantages, they risk functioning as structural defenses against the vulnerability and authentic intimacy essential to transformative psychotherapy. Through analysis of the therapeutic alliance, relational dynamics, and the psychology of vulnerability, this paper contends that the structural form of telepsychiatry does not alter the inherent nature of the therapeutic experience, whereas AI-mediated therapy may collude with maladaptive defenses, fundamentally altering the nature of the therapeutic encounter.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceMental DisordersPsychotherapyHumansMental Health TeletherapyTherapeutic Alliance

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.