ArticleBMJ digital health & AI2025
Healthcare professionals' views on implementing digital health tools in psychosis: a national survey in the UK.
Article in BMJ digital health & AI, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Service Users' Views on Digital Remote Monitoring for Psychosis: Survey Study.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- Mind the gap: aligning clinician and patient priorities in digital mental health.BMJ digital health & AI · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Psychosis is a severe mental health problem and a huge public health challenge, but treatment is often delayed and inefficient. Digital health tools (DHTs) can support healthcare delivery and facilitate self-management. This study aimed to thoroughly understand staff members' views and opinions on implementing DHTs to ensure such tools target unmet needs, are acceptable and maintain patient, service and public trust. Methods and analysis: A bespoke survey was developed to capture key issues surrounding implementation and acceptability of DHTs in SMI and rolled out nationally online to mental health staff working across 31 National Health Service sites in the UK. Results: We received 352 completed surveys. The results showed that most staff (74.2%) would like to implement DHTs in clinical practice. Regarding digital remote monitoring, staff felt less comfortable about passive sensing versus active symptom monitoring and felt less comfortable about tracking service users' behaviours or whereabouts than tracking feelings or general health. Discussion: To our knowledge, this is the first national survey investigating staff views on digital mental health in psychosis in the UK. This study revealed new understanding of staff views on using DHTs in psychosis in general and using smartphone apps and wearables for remote monitoring and passive sensing specifically. Future studies are needed to optimise implementation strategies to address the barriers for technologies that have demonstrated feasibility, acceptability, usability, safety and effectiveness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.