The Provision and Utilization of Telehealth Within Academic Mental Health Clinics in North America During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
ObjectiveTo document the experience of 14 academic child and adolescent psychiatry programs in transitioning to and managing telehealth services during the COVID-19 pandemic. The goal was to understand how programs adopted and sustained telehealth during the pandemic. Telehealth was defined as services delivered via videoconferencing and telephony.MethodIn this descriptive study, faculty from 14 programs completed online surveys about the use of both telehealth and in-person services from February 2020 to June 2021. Survey questions addressed telehealth practices (eg, policies, support resources), monthly service utilization, telehealth modality (videoconferencing vs telephony), and missed appointments.ResultsPrograms varied in the proportion of appointments delivered by telehealth before the pandemic (February 2020; 0%-27%). By May 2020, all programs were providing a majority of visits via telehealth (64%-100%). In June 2021, all programs continued to provide services via telehealth (41%-100%) and reported that they would continue to do so moving forward. Programs addressed many challenges to telehealth provision during the study period, including adding interpreter services, technological support for providers and patients, and formalizing safety and training requirements.ConclusionAcademic child and adolescent psychiatry programs provided outpatient services primarily via telehealth throughout the COVID-19 pandemic and reported that they planned to continue using telehealth in combination with in-person services moving forward. Academic programs should address logistical, technological, and financial barriers to the sustained use of telehealth. To document the experience of 14 academic child and adolescent psychiatry programs in transitioning to and managing telehealth services during the COVID-19 pandemic. The goal was to understand how programs adopted and sustained telehealth during the pandemic. Telehealth was defined as services delivered via videoconferencing and telephony. In this descriptive study, faculty from 14 programs completed online surveys about the use of both telehealth and in-person services from February 2020 to June 2021. Survey questions addressed telehealth practices (eg, policies, support resources), monthly service utilization, telehealth modality (videoconferencing vs telephony), and missed appointments. Programs varied in the proportion of appointments delivered by telehealth before the pandemic (February 2020; 0%-27%). By May 2020, all programs were providing a majority of visits via telehealth (64%-100%). In June 2021, all programs continued to provide services via telehealth (41%-100%) and reported that they would continue to do so moving forward. Programs addressed many challenges to telehealth provision during the study period, including adding interpreter services, technological support for providers and patients, and formalizing safety and training requirements. Academic child and adolescent psychiatry programs provided outpatient services primarily via telehealth throughout the COVID-19 pandemic and reported that they planned to continue using telehealth in combination with in-person services moving forward. Academic programs should address logistical, technological, and financial barriers to the sustained use of telehealth.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».