Trial reportEvidence-based mental health2017
Users' experiences of an online intervention for bipolar disorder: important lessons for design and evaluation.
Trial report in Evidence-based mental health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Barriers and Facilitators of User Engagement With Digital Mental Health Interventions for People With Psychosis or Bipolar Disorder: Systematic Review and Best-Fit Framework Synthesis.JMIR mental health · 2025Pooled it
- Barriers to and Facilitators of User Engagement With Digital Mental Health Interventions: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Pooled it
- Adaptive Elements in Internet-Delivered Psychological Treatment Systems: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Pooled it
- Using EMPOWER in daily life: a qualitative investigation of implementation experiences.BMC psychiatry · 2023Trial
- What influences engagement with a bipolar disorder self-management app? A qualitative investigation of use of the PolarUs app.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- Ensuring patient and public involvement in the transition to AI-assisted mental health care: A systematic scoping review and agenda for design justice.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021Article
- Understanding Implementation of a Digital Self-Monitoring Intervention for Relapse Prevention in Psychosis: Protocol for a Mixed Method Process Evaluation.JMIR research protocols · 2019Article
- How Inclusive, User-Centered Design Research Can Improve Psychological Therapies for Psychosis: Development of SlowMo.JMIR mental health · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe evidence base for digital interventions for physical and mental health, including severe and enduring mental health difficulties, is increasing. In a feasibility trial, web-based Enhanced Relapse Prevention (ERPonline) for bipolar disorder demonstrated high recruitment and retention rates. Relative to participants in the waitlist control group, those who received ERPonline showed increased monitoring for early warning signs of relapse and had developed more positive illness models.
objectiveTo understand users' motivations and barriers for taking part in an online/telephone-based trial, and for engagement with ERPonline.
methodsParticipants from the trial who had been allocated to receive ERPonline were purposively sampled to participate in telephone-based, in-depth qualitative interviews about their experiences. Interviews (n
findingsParticipants took part due to the convenient, flexible and rewarding aspects of the trial design, as well as a desire to improve the mental health of themselves and others. Barriers included extensive assessments, practical difficulties and mood. ERPonline was was generally considered to be accessible, relevant and straightforward, but there were individual preferences regarding design, content and who it was for. Several participants reported positive changes, but there was a sense that digital interventions should not replace routine care.
conclusionsThere are a number of barriers and facilitators to consider when evaluating and implementing digital interventions. Individual preferences and human contact were key factors for both trial design and engagement with an online intervention. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Digital interventions should be co-produced, personalised, interactive and embedded as one component in a broader package of care. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN56908625; Post-results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.