Research
SimHealth is being developed for supervised evaluation: feasibility first, then expansion only where safety, governance, and appropriate oversight are in place.
Rationale
SimHealth is being designed as a structured digital companion for high-risk moments — for example, urge spikes, stress periods, or “just one bet” thoughts — with the aim of improving continuity between clinical sessions in a supervised and carefully governed context.
The research programme is intentionally conservative. The first objective is to assess feasibility, safety, usability, and acceptability, rather than making claims about clinical effectiveness before appropriate evaluation.
Research orientation
The emphasis is on disciplined pilot design, explicit boundaries, and careful reporting. SimHealth is not being positioned as an effectiveness claim at this stage, but as a project requiring structured evaluation before any broader interpretation.
Methodology
SimHealth is intended for staged evaluation — beginning with small supervised pilots and progressing only when safety, governance, and clinical oversight are clearly established. The priority is careful iteration rather than uncontrolled release.
Staged evaluation plan
- Phase 0 — Feasibility design: safety-first UX, crisis signposting, consent flows, governance documentation, and practical workflow review.
- Phase 1 — Supervised pilot: small cohort, clinician oversight, and observation of feasibility, usability, and safety signals.
- Phase 2 — Expanded evaluation (if justified): broader study design, stronger formal oversight, and more structured evaluation only where earlier phases support it.
Data handling (privacy-first)
Where data collection forms part of a pilot, it is intended to be optional and used only with explicit participant consent. Collection should be limited to what is necessary for evaluation and improvement, aligned with GDPR principles and appropriate governance.
- Consent-led: opt-in participation and clear explanation of purpose.
- Data minimisation: collect the minimum necessary and avoid unnecessary identifiers.
- Protection: anonymise where feasible; otherwise pseudonymise and restrict access appropriately.
- Purpose limitation: no secondary use without appropriate governance and justification.
Outcomes
No outcomes are claimed at this stage. Reporting will remain conservative and tied to appropriate evaluation design. Early work is focused on feasibility, safety, acceptability, and engagement rather than effectiveness claims.
Early evaluation signals
- Feasibility: whether the system can be used safely and consistently within real pathways.
- Acceptability: user experience, clinician fit, and practical tolerability.
- Engagement: continuity between sessions without coercive mechanisms.
- Safety signals: identification of risk points and appropriateness of signposting.
- Clinical usability: clarity, low burden, and workable governance boundaries.