Let’s start at the beginning. You went from being a psychologist in private practice and an adjunct clinical professor at Stanford to working at a start-up. That’s not a typical career trajectory for a clinician, is it?

When I was at Stanford’s School of Medicine, I participated in many traditional academic activities: writing grants, teaching, and training others. I really enjoyed it but also developed a humble respect for how long it takes to execute federally funded research. It takes an average of eight years before the intervention you’re studying might actually reach someone in need. I found myself growing frustrated and fatigued by the process and timelines. I was eager to make a faster impact with evidence-based treatments, knowing what many of us know: so many people are suffering, and so many people are in need.

What pushed you to make a change?

A close and previous colleague of mine at Stanford, Dr. Alison Darcy, told me about a company she founded, Woebot Health. It offered an opportunity to change the very things that frustrated me. Working on a new way to reach people in need by leveraging both evidence-based practice and technology, combined with scientific and clinical rigor, to eliminate common access barriers was very exciting and compelling. 

Take us back to your first day at the company. What was that like?

Nothing short of thrilling! I have a photo of the office back then, which had a picture of Woebot outside the threshold. I sent it to my husband and said, “Here we go!” It was such a different world to go to, from a huge place like Stanford to a startup with a pool table, couches, and an open floor plan. It opened my mind to all the ways we can work together and iterate and use science and decades worth of evidence-based practice to help people. To this day, I still find the mission of the company, and knowing that what we’re doing is serving people in need really exhilarating.

That sense of service has been a hallmark in your career as a clinician, too.

Yes. I still see patients every Thursday. It keeps me connected to the people we’re trying to help and to my Stanford colleagues. And I continue to do all the things that other active licensed psychologists do, including keeping my license and my education up to date. I also teach a seminar on clinical supervision at Stanford as part of my adjunct responsibilities. So I’m constantly thinking about how the field is evolving and how to talk with young minds and my scientific and clinical colleagues about that.

What have the five years at Woebot Health been like for you?

I’ve learned a tremendous amount. The field of digital mental health has learned a lot as well. It’s great to be part of something that’s constantly growing. It requires a relative degree of commitment, or maybe stubbornness because healthcare can move at a glacial pace. You have to remain ever-focused on the North Star and keep going.

What do your former colleagues think about your transition to a start-up?

Most recognize there is a need because demand far outstrips the supply. There are a myriad of ways that people have thought about approaching this. Some are completely open to digital augmenting their practice, while others might be hesitant about it. I think it’s the field’s responsibility to educate the current and next generation of mental health providers about digital interventions, how to evaluate and test them, and how to talk to patients about them. We’re all here because we care about people and want to serve them.

What keeps you energized?

So many things! My colleagues, and having scientific discussions with them and thinking through the lifecycle of our product development. And, of course, the people who use our products. I recently read a quote from a user that said, “I didn’t feel judged. I finally felt seen,” and it just warmed my heart. I’d also say growing my team and creating a space in tech for other scientists and like-minded mental healthcare workers is extraordinarily energizing.

What has surprised you the most?

Maybe my greenness at the outset didn’t allow me to see just how long it can take healthcare to change. What we are doing is trying to add optionality to a menu that’s been static for many years, and the pace of change adoption that we sometimes see has been surprising and humbling. 

What’s been your most significant success?

On the one hand, it’s the collective body of research that we’ve set up across multiple products. That’s been a huge endeavor. On the other, I’m really excited about a recently completed study with adolescents that took place in an outpatient children’s hospital system. We’ll be able to talk about that more soon.

Is there a failure that you learned from?

Mistakes are learning opportunities, but they can also be hard. There are times I wish I had done something differently in a study, set something up differently, or measured something that I didn’t, and we lost that opportunity for the data.

How have the company’s clinical studies changed over these years?

Several years ago, one of our data scientists and I talked about how we were inviting our research participants to self-identify, and we started to reform our self-identity or demographic battery. Because of that conversation and our willingness to grow, we now understand much more about who’s coming to our studies, their responses, and their satisfaction with our products. We’ve generated so much more knowledge across these various forms of self-identity because we asked and welcomed them. 

What do you hope the world of mental health looks like for humans in the future?

Equitable. It is beyond time for this to happen! It should anger us that people don’t have access to the care they need. People are suffering, the data is clear, the trajectories have been ongoing over decades. It’s time for equitable access.

If there were one thing you could change about mental healthcare or how it’s delivered, what would it be?

Add a relational agent to the menu of options you offer to people in need. Recognize that the optionality can be changed. There’s still definite value to medications and face-to-face psychotherapy, yet we – especially the people presenting for care – need more options. 

Truly recognizing this, and having the system absorb this change,  would be my goal.