
Introduction: The effectiveness of any new technology is typically measured in order to determine whether it successfully achieves equal or superior objectives over what is currently offered. Research in telemental health—in this article mainly referring to telepsychiatry and psychological services—has advanced rapidly since 2003, and a new effectiveness review is needed. Materials and Methods: The authors reviewed the published literature to synthesize information on what is and what is not effective related to telemental health. Terms for the search included, but were not limited to, telepsychiatry, effectiveness, mental health, e-health, videoconferencing, telemedicine, cost, access, and international. Results: Telemental health is effective for diagnosis and assessment across many populations (adult, child, geriatric, and ethnic) and for disorders in many settings (emergency, home health) and appears to be comparable to in-person care. In addition, this review has identified new models of care (i.e., collaborative care, asynchronous, mobile) with equally positive outcomes. Conclusions: Telemental health is effective and increases access to care. Future directions suggest the need for more research on service models, specific disorders, the issues relevant to culture and language, and cost.
Mental Health Services, Age Factors, Videoconferencing, Health Services Accessibility, Telemedicine, United States, Program Evaluation
Mental Health Services, Age Factors, Videoconferencing, Health Services Accessibility, Telemedicine, United States, Program Evaluation
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 867 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 0.1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 0.1% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 0.1% |
