Mechanisms of Change in Digital Health Interventions for Mental Disorders in Youth: Systematic Review

Background Digital health interventions (DHIs) are efficacious for several mental disorders in youth; however, integrated, evidence-based knowledge about the mechanisms of change in these interventions is lacking. Objective This systematic review aims to comprehensively evaluate studies on mediators and mechanisms of change in different DHIs for common mental disorders in children and adolescents. Methods A systematic literature search of the electronic databases Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO was conducted, complemented by backward and forward searches. Two independent reviewers selected studies for inclusion, extracted the data, and rated the methodological quality of eligible studies (ie, risk of bias and 8 quality criteria for process research). Results A total of 25 studies that have evaluated 39 potential mediators were included in this review. Cognitive mediators were the largest group of examined intervening variables, followed by a broad range of emotional and affective, interpersonal, parenting behavior, and other mediators. The mediator categories with the highest percentages of significant intervening variables were the groups of affective mediators (4/4, 100%) and combined cognitive mediators (13/19, 68%). Although more than three-quarters of the eligible studies met 5 or more quality criteria, causal conclusions have been widely precluded. Conclusions The findings of this review might guide the empirically informed advancement of DHIs, contributing to improved intervention outcomes, and the discussion of methodological recommendations for process research might facilitate mediation studies with more pertinent designs, allowing for conclusions with higher causal certainty in the future.

Download Full-text

Mechanisms of Change in Digital Health Interventions for Mental Disorders in Youth: Systematic Review (Preprint)

10.2196/preprints.29742 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Matthias Domhardt ◽

Sophie Engler ◽

Hannah Nowak ◽

Arne Lutsch ◽

Amit Baumel ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Mental Disorders ◽

Digital Health ◽

Quality Criteria ◽

Process Research ◽

Health Interventions ◽

Mechanisms Of Change ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Cognitive Mediators ◽

Intervening Variables

BACKGROUND Digital health interventions (DHIs) are efficacious for several mental disorders in youth; however, integrated, evidence-based knowledge about the mechanisms of change in these interventions is lacking. OBJECTIVE This systematic review aims to comprehensively evaluate studies on mediators and mechanisms of change in different DHIs for common mental disorders in children and adolescents. METHODS A systematic literature search of the electronic databases Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO was conducted, complemented by backward and forward searches. Two independent reviewers selected studies for inclusion, extracted the data, and rated the methodological quality of eligible studies (ie, risk of bias and 8 quality criteria for process research). RESULTS A total of 25 studies that have evaluated 39 potential mediators were included in this review. Cognitive mediators were the largest group of examined intervening variables, followed by a broad range of emotional and affective, interpersonal, parenting behavior, and other mediators. The mediator categories with the highest percentages of significant intervening variables were the groups of affective mediators (4/4, 100%) and combined cognitive mediators (13/19, 68%). Although more than three-quarters of the eligible studies met 5 or more quality criteria, causal conclusions have been widely precluded. CONCLUSIONS The findings of this review might guide the empirically informed advancement of DHIs, contributing to improved intervention outcomes, and the discussion of methodological recommendations for process research might facilitate mediation studies with more pertinent designs, allowing for conclusions with higher causal certainty in the future.

Download Full-text

Primary care professionals’ attitudes towards digital health interventions for common mental disorders: study protocol for a mixed methods systematic review

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045657 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (6) ◽

pp. e045657

Author(s):

Maria Hanf ◽

Julian Hirt ◽

Marjan van den Akker

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Primary Care ◽

Mixed Methods ◽

Mental Disorders ◽

Care Setting ◽

Primary Care Setting ◽

Digital Health ◽

Health Interventions ◽

Mental Health Interventions ◽

Primary Care Professionals

IntroductionMental disorders such as depression are common, and an estimated 264 million people are affected by them throughout the world. In recent years, studies on digital health interventions to treat mental disorders have shown evidence of their efficacy, and interest in using them has increased as a result. In the primary care setting, depression and anxiety are the two most frequently diagnosed and treated mental disorders. When they do not refer them to specialists, primary care professionals such as general practitioners treat patients with mental disorders themselves but have insufficient time to treat them adequately. Furthermore, there is a shortage of psychotherapists and those that exist have long waiting lists for an appointment. The purpose of this mixed methods systematic review is to explore the attitudes of primary care professionals towards the use of digital health interventions in the treatment of patients with mental disorders. Their attitudes will provide an indication whether digital mental health interventions can effectively complement standard care in the primary care setting.Methods and analysisWe searched for qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies published in English, German, Spanish, Russian, French and Dutch after January 2010 for inclusion in the review. The included studies must involve digital mental health interventions conducted via computer and/or mobile devices in the primary care setting. The search was conducted in July 2020 in the following electronic bibliographic databases: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Web of Science Core Collection. Two reviewers will independently screen titles, abstracts and full texts and extract data. We will use the ‘Integrated methodology’ framework to combine both quantitative and qualitative data.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required. We will disseminate the results of the mixed methods systematic review in a peer-reviewed journal and scientific conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020188879.

Download Full-text

The Acceptability and Usability of Digital Health Interventions for Adults With Depression, Anxiety, and Somatoform Disorders: Qualitative Systematic Review and Meta-Synthesis

Journal of Medical Internet Research ◽

10.2196/16228 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 22 (7) ◽

pp. e16228 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Shireen Patel ◽

Athfah Akhtar ◽

Sam Malins ◽

Nicola Wright ◽

Emma Rowley ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Mental Health ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Somatoform Disorders ◽

Digital Health ◽

Health Interventions ◽

Health Conditions ◽

Future Research ◽

World Population ◽

Personal Support ◽

The Individual

Background The prevalence of mental health disorders continues to rise, with almost 4% of the world population having an anxiety disorder and almost 3.5% having depression in 2017. Despite the high prevalence, only one-third of people with depression or anxiety receive treatment. Over the last decade, the use of digital health interventions (DHIs) has risen rapidly as a means of accessing mental health care and continues to increase. Although there is evidence supporting the effectiveness of DHIs for the treatment of mental health conditions, little is known about what aspects are valued by users and how they might be improved. Objective This systematic review aimed to identify, appraise, and synthesize the qualitative literature available on service users’ views and experiences regarding the acceptability and usability of DHIs for depression, anxiety, and somatoform disorders. Methods A systematic search strategy was developed, and searches were run in 7 electronic databases. Qualitative and mixed methods studies published in English were included. A meta-synthesis was used to interpret and synthesize the findings from the included studies. Results A total of 24 studies were included in the meta-synthesis, and 3 key themes emerged with descriptive subthemes. The 3 key themes were initial motivations and approaches to DHIs, personalization of treatment, and the value of receiving personal support in DHIs. The meta-synthesis suggests that participants’ initial beliefs about DHIs can have an important effect on their engagement with these types of interventions. Personal support was valued very highly as a major component of the success of DHIs. The main reason for this was the way it enabled individual personalization of care. Conclusions Findings from the systematic review have implications for the design of future DHIs to improve uptake, retention, and outcomes in DHIs for depression, anxiety, and somatoform disorders. DHIs need to be personalized to the specific needs of the individual. Future research should explore whether the findings could be generalized to other health conditions.

Download Full-text

Digital Health Interventions for Improving Mental Health Outcomes and Wellbeing for Youth with Type 1 Diabetes: A Systematic Review

Pediatric Diabetes ◽

10.1111/pedi.13304 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Katie Garner ◽

Anna Boggiss ◽

Craig Jefferies ◽

Anna Serlachius

Keyword(s):

Mental Health ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Type 1 Diabetes ◽

Health Outcomes ◽

Digital Health ◽

Health Interventions ◽

Mental Health Outcomes

Download Full-text

The effects of non-clinician guidance on effectiveness and process outcomes of digital mental health interventions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. (Preprint)

10.2196/preprints.36004 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Calista Leung ◽

Julia Pei ◽

Kristen Hudec ◽

Farhud Shams ◽

Richard Munthali ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Mental Health ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Psychosocial Support ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Grey Literature ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Health Interventions ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Process Outcomes ◽

Mental Health Interventions

BACKGROUND Digital mental health interventions are increasingly prevalent in the current context of rapidly evolving technology, and research indicates that they yield effectiveness outcomes comparable to in-person treatment. Integrating professionals (i.e. psychologists, physicians) into digital mental health interventions has been common, and the inclusion of guidance within programs can increase adherence to interventions. However, employing professionals to enhance mental health programs may undermine the scalability of digital interventions. Therefore, delegating guidance tasks to paraprofessionals (peer supporters, technicians, lay counsellors, or other non-clinicians) can help reduce costs and increase accessibility. OBJECTIVE This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the effectiveness, adherence, and other process outcomes of non-clinician guided digital mental health interventions. METHODS Four databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PSYCInfo) were searched for randomized controlled trials published between 2010 and 2020 examining digital mental health interventions. Three journals focused on digital intervention were also hand searched and grey literature was searched using ProQuest and the Cochrane Central Register of Control Trials (CENTRAL). Two researchers independently assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2. Data were collected on effectiveness, adherence, and other process outcomes, and meta-analyses were conducted for effectiveness and adherence outcomes. Non-clinician guided interventions were compared with treatment as usual, clinician-guided interventions, and unguided interventions. RESULTS Thirteen studies qualified for inclusion. Results indicate that non-clinician guided interventions yielded higher post-treatment effectiveness outcomes when compared to conditions involving control programs (e.g. online psychoeducation, monitored attention control) or waitlist controls (k=7, Hedges g=-0.73 (95% CI -1.08 to -0.38)). There are significant differences between non-clinician guided interventions and unguided interventions as well (k=6, Hedges g=-0.17 (95% CI -0.23 to -0.11)). In addition, non-clinician guided interventions did not differ in effectiveness from clinician-guided interventions (k=3, Hedges g=0.08 (95% CI -0.01 to 0.17)). These results suggest that guided digital mental health interventions are helpful to improve mental health outcomes regardless of the qualification, and that the presence of a non-clinician guide improves effectiveness outcomes more than no guidance. Non-clinician guided interventions did not yield significantly different effects on adherence outcomes when compared with unguided interventions (k=3, OR 1.58 (95% CI 0.51 to 4.92)), although a general trend of improved adherence was observed within non-clinician guided interventions. CONCLUSIONS Integrating paraprofessionals and non-clinicians appear to improve outcomes of digital mental health interventions, and may also enhance adherence outcomes (though the trend was nonsignificant). Further research should focus on the specific types of tasks these paraprofessionals can successfully provide (i.e. psychosocial support, therapeutic alliance, technical augmentation) and their associated outcomes. CLINICALTRIAL The protocol is preregistered on PROSPERO (CRD42020191226).

Download Full-text

Systematic review and meta-analysis of attrition within digital health interventions for people with multiple sclerosis (Preprint)

10.2196/preprints.27735 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

William Bevens

Keyword(s):

Multiple Sclerosis ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Digital Health ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Health Interventions ◽

Attrition Rates ◽

Participant Engagement ◽

Randomised Controlled ◽

And Control ◽

Insight Into

BACKGROUND Digital health interventions (DHI) have revolutionised the management of multiple sclerosis (MS). It is now understood that the technological elements that comprise DHIs can influence participant engagement and that people with MS (PwMS) can experience significant barriers to remaining enrolled in DHIs related to the use of these elements. It is essential to explore the influence of technological elements in mitigating attrition after allocation. OBJECTIVE We examined the study design and technological elements of documented DHIs targeted at PwMS and how these correlated with attrition among participants of randomised-controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs (n=17) describing digital technologies for health interventions for PwMS. We analysed attrition of included studies using a random-effects model and meta-regression to measure the association between potential moderators. RESULTS There were no measured differences in attrition between intervention and control arms; however, some of the heterogeneity observed was explained by the composite technological element score. The pooled attrition rates for the intervention and control arms were 10.6% and 11.2% respectively. CONCLUSIONS Ultimately, this paper provides insight into the technological composition of DHIs and will aid in the design of future studies in this area.

Download Full-text