↓ Skip to main content

Implementation of eMental Health care: viewpoints from key informants from organizations and agencies with eHealth mandates

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
257 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
Implementation of eMental Health care: viewpoints from key informants from organizations and agencies with eHealth mandates
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12911-017-0474-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lori Wozney, Amanda S. Newton, Nicole D. Gehring, Kathryn Bennett, Anna Huguet, Lisa Hartling, Michele P. Dyson, Patrick McGrath

Abstract

The use of technology such as computers, tablets, and smartphones to improve access to and the delivery of mental health care (eMental Health care) is growing worldwide. However, despite the rapidly expanding evidence base demonstrating the efficacy of eMental Health care, its implementation in clinical practice and health care systems remains fragmented. To date, no peer-reviewed, key-informant studies have reported on the perspectives of decision-makers concerned with whether and how to implement eMental Health care. From September to November 2015, we conducted 31 interviews with key informants responsible for leadership, policy, research, and/ or information technology in organizations influential in the adoption of technology for eMental Health care. Deductive and inductive thematic analyses of transcripts were conducted using the Behavior Change Wheel as an organizing framework. Frequency and intensity effect sizes were calculated for emerging themes to further explore patterns within the data. Key informant responses (n = 31) representing 6 developed countries and multiple organizations showed consensus on common factors impacting implementation: individual and organizational capacities (e.g., computer literacy skills [patients and providers], knowledge gaps about cyber security, limited knowledge of available services); motivational drivers of technology-based care (e.g., extending care, data analytics); and opportunities for health systems to advance eMental Health care implementation (e.g., intersectoral research, rapid testing cycles, sustainable funding). Frequency effect sizes showed strong associations between implementation and credibility, knowledge, workflow, patient empowerment, electronic medical record (EMR) integration, sustained funding and intersectoral networks. Intensity effect sizes showed the highest concentration of statements (>10% of all comments) related to funding, credibility, knowledge gaps, and patient empowerment. This study provides previously unavailable information about key informant perspectives on eMental Health care implementation. The themes that emerged, namely the need to intensify intersectoral research, measure/monitor readiness to implement, define cost-utility benchmarks, raise awareness about available technologies, and test assumptions that 'proven' technologies will be easily integrated can inform the design and evaluation of eMental Health care implementation models.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 257 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Norway 1 <1%
Unknown 256 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 36 14%
Student > Master 35 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 12%
Student > Bachelor 29 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 7%
Other 52 20%
Unknown 54 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 15%
Psychology 36 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 24 9%
Computer Science 22 9%
Social Sciences 17 7%
Other 51 20%
Unknown 68 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 07 March 2023.
All research outputs
#4,623,149
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#404
of 2,025 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,082
of 318,592 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#9
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,025 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 318,592 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.