Cited by 46Digital Mental Health InterventionsTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationHealth Policy Implementation Science

Adoption of technology‐enhanced treatments: Conceptual and practical considerations.

Open access
Anton, Margaret T., Jones, Deborah J.·2017·Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice

Abstract

As the efficacy of technology-enhanced mental health service delivery models (i.e., supportive or adjunctive technological tools) are examined, we must inform and guide clinician decision-making regarding acceptance and, in turn, uptake. Accordingly, this review aims to move beyond traditional discussions of geographic barriers by integrating, reconciling, and extending literatures on dissemination and implementation, as well as technology uptake, in order to anticipate and address organizational and clinician barriers to adoption of technology-enhancements. Specifically, a five-stage model is proposed to address organizational readiness for and clinician acceptance of technology-enhancements to evidence-based treatments, as well as the relevance of current adoption strategies for technology-enhanced services. Our aim is to provide a guiding framework for future research and practice.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/cpsp.12197

Cites

95 of 95 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Several other recently published technology implementation frameworks have embraced complexity theory and argued strongly for a developmental, contextualized, and adaptive approach.

    “Several other recently published technology implementation frameworks have embraced complexity theory and argued strongly for a developmental, contextualized, and adaptive approach [43,47,53-60].”

    From Beyond Adoption: A New Framework for Theorizing and Evaluating Nonadoption, Abandonment, and Challenges to the Scale-Up, Spread, and Sustainability of Health and Care Technologies (2017) · cites this paper as [53]

    In “Adoption of Technology-Enhanced Services: A Conceptual Framework” (page unavailable), the paper proposes a five-stage developmental framework. Its Stage 1 discussion recommends iterative design that accounts for different adoption settings, supporting a contextualized approach. Our copy does not show the framework embracing complexity theory; its discussion of “complexity” concerns perceived difficulty of use. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Campbell ANC Muench F Nunes EV 2015 Technology-based behavioral interventions for alcohol and drug use problems Marsch LA Lord SE Dallery J Behavioral Healthcare and Technology: Using Science-Based Innovations to Transform Practice 209 223 New York, NY Oxford University Press
  2. Hughes PP Goldstein MM 2015 Privacy, security, and regulatory considerations as related to behavioral health information technology Marsch LA Lord SE Dallery J Behavioral Healthcare and Technology: Using Science-Based Innovations to Transform Practice 224 238 New York, NY Oxford University Press
  3. Lord SE 2015 Models for effective dissemination and implementation of technology-based therapeutic approaches to behavioral healthcare Marsch LA Lord SE Dallery J Behavioral Healthcare and Technology: Using Science-Based Innovations to Transform Practice 209 223 New York, NY Oxford University Press
  4. Maheu MM 2015 Challenges associated with Telemental Health Serive Delivery Coalition for Technology in Behavioral Science Retrieved from http://ctibs.org/ctibs-urges-review-of-online-therapy/
  5. Onken LS Shoham V 2015 Technology and the stage model of behavioral intervention development Marsch LA Lord SE Dallery J Behavioral Healthcare and Technology: Using Science-Based Innovations to Transform Practice 3 12 New York, NY Oxford University Press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Anton, M. T., & Jones, D. J.
Affiliations
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Venue
Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice
Published
2017-09
Volume
24
Issue
3
Pages
223-240
ISSN
  • 0969-5893 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-2850
OpenAlex
W2612773831
Cited by
46
References
95
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3
FWCI
6.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical Psychology Science and Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH100377)
  • National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (T32-HD07376)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
Keywords
technology adoption, clinician acceptance, organizational readiness, dissemination and implementation, evidence-based treatment, barriers to adoption, adoption strategies, five-stage model

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review