Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30050914›Full record

ReviewmHealth2018

Digital apothecaries: a vision for making health care interventions accessible worldwide.

Ricardo F Muñoz, Denise A Chavira, Joseph A Himle, Kelly Koerner, Jordana Muroff, Julia Reynolds, Raphael D Rose, Josef I Ruzek, Bethany A Teachman, Stephen M Schueller

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in mHealth, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

43 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Identifying person-level factors to guide digital mental health treatments for cancer survivors: an ecological momentary assessment study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Ricardo F MuñozInstitute for International Internet Interventions for Health (i4Health), Palo Alto University, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Denise A ChaviraDepartment of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Joseph A HimleDepartment of Psychiatry, School of Social Work, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Kelly KoernerEvidence-Based Practice Institute, LLC, Seattle, WA, USA.
Jordana MuroffSchool of Social Work, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA.
Julia ReynoldsCentre for Mental Health Research, Research School of Psychology, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
Raphael D RoseDepartment of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Josef I RuzekCenter for mHealth, Palo Alto University, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Bethany A TeachmanDepartment of Psychology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
Stephen M SchuellerDepartment of Psychology and Social Behavior, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA.

Funding

Effectiveness of interpretation training to reduce anxiety: Evaluating technology-based delivery models and methods to reduce attritionR01MH113752 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA · PI TEACHMAN, BETHANY A · 2017 to 2020
$2.5M
Attention Training for Underserved Youth With AnxietyR34MH109601 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI CHANG, SUSANNA W., CHAVIRA, DENISE A · 2017 to 2019
$693k
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH113752NIMH NIH HHS R34 MH109601
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Evidence-based psychological interventions are growing in number but are not within reach of many individuals who could benefit from them. The recent revolution in digital technologies now makes it possible to reach people around the globe with digital interventions in the form of web sites, mobile applications, wearable devices, and so on. Although a plethora of digital interventions are available online few are evidence-based and individuals have little guidance to decide among the multitude of options. We propose the development of "digital apothecaries," that is, online repositories of evidence-based digital interventions. As portals to effective interventions, digital apothecaries would be useful to individuals who could access evidence-based interventions directly, to health care providers, who could identify specific digital tools to suggest to or use with their patients, and to researchers, who could study a range of tools with large samples, enabling comparative tests and evaluation of moderators of effects. We present a taxonomy of types of in-person and digital interventions ranging from traditional therapy without the use of digital tools to totally automated self-help interventions. This taxonomy highlights the potential of blending digital tools into health care systems to expand their reach. Digital apothecaries would provide access to evidence-based digital interventions (both free and paid versions), provide data on effectiveness (including effectiveness for diverse populations), and encourage the development and testing of more such tools. Other issues discussed include: criteria for inclusion of interventions into digital apothecaries; how digital tools could enhance health care for diverse populations; and cautionary notes regarding potential negative unintended consequences of the adoption of digital interventions into the health care system. In particular, we warn about the potential misuse of evidence-based digital interventions to justify reducing access to live providers. Digital apothecaries bring with them the promise of reducing health disparities by reaching large numbers of individuals across the world who need health interventions but are not currently receiving them. The health care field is encouraged to mindfully develop this promise, while being alert not to cause inadvertent harm.

Indexed as

disseminationinternet interventionsmental healthmHealthmobile apps

Identifiers

PMID30050914
PMCPMC6044048

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.