Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39269570›Full record

SynthesisCommunity mental health journal2025

Virtual Service Delivery in Mental Health and Substance Use Care: A Systematic Review of Preference Elicitation Studies.

Carly Mallise, Laura Wall, Francesco Paolucci, Kate Davies, Gina La Hera Fuentes, Jessica Wilson, Campbell Tickner, Frances Kay-Lambkin, Milena Heinsch

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Community mental health journal, 2025. 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

9 authors.

Carly MallisePopulation Health, Hunter New England Local Health District, Wallsend, NSW, 2287, Australia. carly.mallise@newcastle.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0003-2189-8035
Laura WallSchool of Psychological Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia.
Francesco PaolucciNewcastle Business School, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia.
Kate DaviesHomelessness NSW, Woolloomooloo, NSW, 2011, Australia.
Gina La Hera FuentesNewcastle Business School, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia.
Jessica WilsonBrain and Mind, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, VIC, 3052, Australia.
Campbell TicknerSchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia.
Frances Kay-LambkinSchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia.
Milena HeinschSchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mental health and substance use disorders affect the lives of many people worldwide. Prevention and treatment of these conditions is important for optimal health and wellbeing, yet service access barriers are common. Virtual models of care may help to reduce barriers to receiving care. However, to facilitate uptake and use of virtual services, they need to appeal to patients and clinicians. This systematic review aimed to synthesise preference elicitation studies to determine what features of virtual mental health and substance use care are preferred by service users and service providers. Following the PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews, we searched PubMed, PsycINFO, EconLit, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Academic Search Ultimate, and ProQuest Central for all available studies from database inception until May 2023. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used to assess the methodological quality of included studies. Nineteen studies met the eligibility criteria. However, none examined preferences for elements of different models of virtual care. Across the included studies, we identified 41 unique features that mapped to four themes of mental health and substance use care ('service', 'treatment', 'clinician' and 'additional supports'). Participant preferences were for individual, in-person, effective, flexible, and low-cost treatment. These preferences varied based on demographic factors, such as culture, gender, and participant type (e.g., patients, clinicians, general population). A user-centred approach should be adopted when designing and implementing mental health and substance use services. While preferences for features of mental health and substance use services more broadly are known, preferences for different models of virtual care remain unexplored. Future research should examine what features of virtual services would lead to optimal uptake and use across different users and stakeholders.

Indexed as

Mental DisordersMental Health ServicesPatient PreferenceSubstance-Related DisordersTelemedicineHumansDiscrete choice experimentHealth servicesPreferencesService providerService userTelehealth

Identifiers

PMID39269570
PMCPMC11868160

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.