Educational psychology tools vs clinical care: how orgs should choose
The common trap is treating any scored inventory as a diagnostic system. Psyio is explicit: educational support — not diagnosis, treatment, or prescription.
Educational support — not diagnosis, treatment, or prescription.
Three checks
Clarify positioning before feature lists.
- Does it claim diagnosis / treatment / prescribing? If yes, evaluate under clinical rules
- Does it publish provenance, boundaries, and crisis referral notes?
- Can organizers audit who opened the scene, who ran, and how summaries export?
What Psyio does and does not do
Provides: provisionable psychology Skills, scene-code batches, terminal runs, traceable reports and exports. Does not provide: diagnostic conclusions, prescribing, or crisis handling that replaces licensed clinicians.
Procurement checklist
Put these into acceptance criteria before go-live.
- Skill pages show provenance / framework / boundaries
- Console can export per-scene summaries
- Compliance copy and crisis tips are visible or configurable
- Metering and seat rules are clear (seats ≠ participant count)
FAQ
Can an AI psychology report serve as a diagnosis?
No. Psyio reports are for educational feedback and organizer-side ops — not a substitute for licensed diagnostic documents.
Why do skill pages emphasize provenance?
Orgs need auditable theory and citation trails to judge fit. Provenance is the baseline against black-box inventories.