[acituan]

> Our EHR also automates administrative tasks such as collecting intake forms and getting reimbursement from insurance companies.

Sounds good on paper but I am not sure if I would want processes that heavily collect psychometric data and automate insurance to coexist in the same company. It is a matter of a flip of a switch (e.g. repealing of ACA) before insurance companies might legally have access to that psychometric data, with sweet profits left to this company. Even though right now they are in HIPAA land, since that data probably doesn’t qualify as therapists notes, it won’t have the same protections.

My second issue is overfocus on treatments like ketamine, psychedelics etc. I get that they target treatment resistant population, but maybe having this additional psychometric data would have rendered more conventional treatments efficacious to begin with? Or this would be a therapy modality in itself? (Pervasive technology) Or maybe it is going to be completely neutral because the extra effort required from therapist to analyze and interpret this data is not going to be worth it, or the AI won’t match the sophistication of the problems? Biomarkers for mental ails is indeed the holy grail, but the signal to noise ratio with what we have without getting invasive is pretty low.

Sounds like right now the focus of the compnay is pretty diffuse waiting to pivot on whatever proves most profitable, which is perfectly fine. Hopefully it will end up being something useful to the humanity too.