Psychologist advisory committee flags supervision, telehealth and AI in survey review; discusses potential actions

Committee members reviewed draft survey reports compiled by BSRB staff and discussed three topics the surveys emphasized: supervision and training quality, telehealth practice issues, and the use of artificial intelligence in practice.

Supervision and training: Staff summarized that a subset of respondents reported "negative issues involving supervision" over the past two years, with themes including what some respondents described as lower trainee readiness post-graduation, generational differences, burnout and variability across internship/postdoctoral training. Sarah Kirk, an advisory committee member, said what stood out was "the tone of the respondents with respect to their thoughts about their not being, as much maturity or as much...as being as competent as supervisees in the past." Committee members noted variability across programs and levels of training and suggested the advisory committee could identify actionable items for the board, such as clarifying BSRB supervision recommendations and guidance about psychologists supervising professionals from other disciplines.

Telehealth: The committee reviewed answers from roughly 236 psychologists on telehealth. David Fye summarized that "142 reported having experienced no issues with telehealth," and that common positives included improved access and rural outreach, while negatives included connectivity, client privacy (clients or providers not in secure locations), insurance barriers and difficulties with state lines. Committee members discussed whether the board could adopt guidance on telehealth confidentiality checks and whether to clarify rules about practicing across state lines; staff reminded the group that state licensure authority varies and multi-state compacts and statutory constraints affect telehealth across jurisdictions.

Artificial intelligence: About 80% of respondents reported not currently using AI in practice; those who did most often used it for writing and grammar; a small number used AI for documentation, treatment planning or research. Members raised ethical and practical concerns. One member warned of skill erosion from overreliance on AI, using a "crayons" analogy to illustrate potential loss of core skills. Others raised HIPAA and privacy concerns about putting clinical information into public AI tools, and questioned whether patients should be notified when AI is used in clinical tasks. Christopher Leonard urged caution about clinicians placing clinical content into public AI services, and Linda Heitzman Powell suggested public-facing guidance so consumers know whether they're interacting with human clinicians or AI.

What the advisory committee will do: Members asked staff to identify actionable items the committee might recommend to the board, including clarifying supervision guidance, creating telehealth confidentiality checklists or recommendations, and developing policy guidance or consumer-disclosure recommendations regarding AI use. David Fye said staff will continue to gather materials and present possible recommendations at future meetings.

Ending: The committee moved on to new-business items after agreeing these topics warranted additional follow-up and possible recommendations to the BSRB.