Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Emma Elizabeth McGinty

dblp:399/3330 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2026
0009-0003-5095-9308ORCID · reported

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 2 · 2 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
2 papers
Health and well-being technologies · 68% Human-AI interaction · 32%
Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Medical and health informatics · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Health and well-being technologies › digital well-being
mental well-being support
1.012026
Framing Responsible Design of AI for Mental Well-Being: AI as Primary Care, Nutritional Supplement, or Yoga Instructor? · CHI 2026
Human-AI interaction › responsible AI
responsible AI design
1.012026
Framing Responsible Design of AI for Mental Well-Being: AI as Primary Care, Nutritional Supplement, or Yoga Instructor? · CHI 2026
Health and well-being technologies › mental health
mental healthcare
0.912025
Designing Technologies for Value-based Mental Healthcare: Centering Clinicians' Perspectives on Outcomes Data Specification, Collection, and Use · CHI 2025
Health and well-being technologies
mental health
0.312026
Framing Responsible Design of AI for Mental Well-Being: AI as Primary Care, Nutritional Supplement, or Yoga Instructor? · CHI 2026

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

interview study · 1.7regulatory analysis · 1.0expert interviews · 1.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2026 Framing Responsible Design of AI for Mental Well-Being: AI as Primary Care, Nutritional Supplement, or Yoga Instructor?
abstract
Millions of people now use non-clinical Large Language Model (LLM) tools like ChatGPT for mental well-being support. This paper investigates what it means to design such tools responsibly, and how to operationalize that responsibility in their design and evaluation. By interviewing experts and analyzing related regulations, we found that designing an LLM tool responsibly involves: (1) Articulating the specific benefits it guarantees and for whom. Does it guarantee specific, proven relief, like an over-the-counter drug, or offer minimal guarantees, like a nutritional supplement? (2) Specifying the LLM tool’s “active ingredients” for improving well-being and whether it guarantees their effective delivery (like a primary care provider) or not (like a yoga instructor). These specifications outline an LLM tool’s pertinent risks, appropriate evaluation metrics, and the respective responsibilities of LLM developers, tool designers, and users. These analogies—LLM tools as supplements, drugs, yoga instructors, and primary care providers—can scaffold further conversations about their responsible design.
Ned Cooper, Jose A. Guridi, Angel Hwang, Beth Kolko, Emma Elizabeth McGinty, Qian Yang 0004
CHI5
2025 Designing Technologies for Value-based Mental Healthcare: Centering Clinicians' Perspectives on Outcomes Data Specification, Collection, and Use
abstract
Health information technologies are transforming how mental healthcare is paid for through value-based care programs, which tie payment to data quantifying care outcomes. But, it is unclear what outcomes data these technologies should store, how to engage users in data collection, and how outcomes data can improve care. Given these challenges, we conducted interviews with 30 U.S.-based mental health clinicians to explore the design space of health information technologies that support outcomes data specification, collection, and use in value-based mental healthcare. Our findings center clinicians' perspectives on aligning outcomes data for payment programs and care; opportunities for health technologies and personal devices to improve data collection; and considerations for using outcomes data to hold stakeholders including clinicians, health insurers, and social services financially accountable in value-based mental healthcare. We conclude with implications for future research designing and developing technologies supporting value-based care across stakeholders involved with mental health service delivery.
Daniel A. Adler, Yuewen Yang, Thalia Viranda, Anna R. Van Meter, Emma Elizabeth McGinty, Tanzeem Choudhury
CHI5