↓ Skip to main content

Establishing and Governing e-Mental Health Care in Australia: A Systematic Review of Challenges and A Call For Policy-Focussed Research

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Internet Research, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
13 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
100 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
479 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Establishing and Governing e-Mental Health Care in Australia: A Systematic Review of Challenges and A Call For Policy-Focussed Research
Published in
Journal of Medical Internet Research, January 2016
DOI 10.2196/jmir.4827
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carla Meurk, Janni Leung, Wayne Hall, Brian W Head, Harvey Whiteford

Abstract

Growing evidence attests to the efficacy of e-mental health services. There is less evidence on how to facilitate the safe, effective, and sustainable implementation of these services. We conducted a systematic review on e-mental health service use for depressive and anxiety disorders to inform policy development and identify policy-relevant gaps in the evidence base. Following the PRISMA protocol, we identified research (1) conducted in Australia, (2) on e-mental health services, (3) for depressive or anxiety disorders, and (4) on e-mental health usage, such as barriers and facilitators to use. Databases searched included Cochrane, PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Embase, ProQuest Social Science, and Google Scholar. Sources were assessed according to area and level of policy relevance. The search yielded 1081 studies; 30 studies were included for analysis. Most reported on self-selected samples and samples of online help-seekers. Studies indicate that e-mental health services are predominantly used by females, and those who are more educated and socioeconomically advantaged. Ethnicity was infrequently reported on. Studies examining consumer preferences found a preference for face-to-face therapy over e-therapies, but not an aversion to e-therapy. Content relevant to governance was predominantly related to the organizational dimensions of e-mental health services, followed by implications for community education. Financing and payment for e-services and governance of the information communication technology were least commonly discussed. Little research focuses explicitly on policy development and implementation planning; most research provides an e-services perspective. Research is needed to provide community and policy-maker perspectives. General population studies of prospective treatment seekers that include ethnicity and socioeconomic status and quantify relative preferences for all treatment modalities are necessary.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 479 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 477 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 75 16%
Student > Master 69 14%
Researcher 66 14%
Student > Bachelor 38 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 33 7%
Other 81 17%
Unknown 117 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 70 15%
Social Sciences 69 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 56 12%
Computer Science 42 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 33 7%
Other 73 15%
Unknown 136 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 October 2022.
All research outputs
#1,757,174
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Internet Research
#1,430
of 7,864 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,861
of 401,979 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Internet Research
#23
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,864 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 401,979 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.