Our Outcomes
Progress you can see, not just hope for.
Many practices promise “results.” Few define what that means, measure it consistently, and spell out what happens when progress stalls. We do.
Rappore was built by former clinical leaders at Columbia to deliver evidence-based, clinician-led care designed around depth, not volume. Outcomes are not an add-on. They guide the work.
We provide online psychiatry and therapy for adults in New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut, with particular depth in women’s mental health. Hormonal and reproductive transitions can change symptoms, functioning, and medication risk, and we incorporate that context when relevant.
Symptom relief matters. But symptoms are not the whole story. You can feel “less anxious” and still be avoiding your life. That’s why we track outcomes in two lanes:
Outcomes for Website
-
Symptoms: how intense depression or anxiety feels
-
Function + safety: how your life is working, and whether risk is rising
What we mean by “outcomes”
-
Symptoms (important, not sufficient)
We use validated symptom tools like PHQ-9 (depression) and GAD-7 (anxiety) to make trends visible over time.
-
Function (often neglected, clinically decisive)
We track real-world impairment with a brief functioning measure such as WSAS (5 items) across domains like work, home responsibilities, social life, and relationships.
Why it matters: you can have fewer symptoms and still be stuck. Function often tells the truth sooner.
-
Safety (“red flags” are non-negotiable)
We use structured monitoring for suicidal ideation and other red-flag indicators over time, not as a one-time checkbox. Risk can change between visits, especially during medication changes, acute stress, or sleep disruption.
If you’re in immediate danger or need urgent help, call 911 or contact the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline.
-
Mental Health Fingerprint® (our deeper lens)
Standard measures can miss what’s hiding in plain sight. The Mental Health Fingerprint® tracks domains that often determine whether improvement is real: sleep stability, concentration, irritability, avoidance, and quality-of-life function—so partial improvement doesn’t get mislabeled as success.
What we measure (and why)
When progress stalls, we use a structured review rather than reflexively adding meds or extending the same plan:
-
Re-check the diagnosis (overlap and comorbidity are common)
-
Review adherence + tolerability (side effects can mimic “worsening”)
-
Look for medical contributors (e.g., thyroid dysfunction, sleep disorders)
-
Assess sleep disruption, substances, or new stressors
-
Revisit therapy fit and targets
-
Consider iatrogenic effects from prior changes
-
Choose a documented next step: optimize, switch, augment, shift therapy strategy, or refer to a higher level of care
If you’re not improving, here’s what happens
Most practices stop at symptom scores. We track function separately and risk explicitly because both change the plan in real time. Scores are not automated care—every data point runs through clinical judgment, and complex or non-responding cases are escalated through supervision and case review rather than drifting.
What makes this different
-
Which outcome measures do you use, and why those specifically?
-
Do you track functioning separately from symptoms?
-
How often are measures repeated—and what triggers off-schedule reassessment?
-
What counts as “enough improvement”? How do you define remission vs partial response?
-
What is your protocol when progress is flat at a defined timepoint?
-
How do you monitor for suicide risk and other red flags over time?
-
Who reviews complex or non-responding cases, and how is that supervision structured?
Seven questions you should ask any provider
Protocols only matter if they’re enforced. Publishing our outcomes approach is one form of accountability. Internally, we reinforce these standards through structured documentation, supervision, and routine case review.