Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32788151›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2020

A Novel Multimodal Digital Service (Moderated Online Social Therapy+) for Help-Seeking Young People Experiencing Mental Ill-Health: Pilot Evaluation Within a National Youth E-Mental Health Service.

Mario Alvarez-Jimenez, Simon Rice, Simon D'Alfonso, Steven Leicester, Sarah Bendall, Ingrid Pryor, Penni Russon, Carla McEnery, Olga Santesteban-Echarri, Gustavo Da Costa and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

54 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 107 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Peer-Led Models Focussed on Emotional Distress and Suicide Prevention: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Transdiagnostic prevention in youth mental health, Part II: interventions.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2026
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

16 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Mario Alvarez-JimenezOrygen, Parkville, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3535-9086
Simon RiceOrygen, Parkville, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4045-8553
Simon D'AlfonsoOrygen, Parkville, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7407-8730
Steven Leicesterheadspace National Youth Mental Health Foundation, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3903-7014
Sarah BendallOrygen, Parkville, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1486-6190
Ingrid PryorOrygen, Parkville, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4667-8610
Penni RussonOrygen, Parkville, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7899-7451
Carla McEneryOrygen, Parkville, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9145-9068
Olga Santesteban-EcharriHotchkiss Brain Institute, Psychiatry Department, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-2677-6125
Gustavo Da CostaThe School of Computing and Information Systems, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5348-7420
Tamsyn GilbertsonOrygen, Parkville, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0996-8002
Lee ValentineOrygen, Parkville, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7481-6537
Laia SolvesConsorci Sanitari del Maresme, Department of Psychiatry, Hospital of Mataro, Mataro, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-5661-4106
Aswin RatheeshOrygen, Parkville, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8029-9422
Patrick D McGorryOrygen, Parkville, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3789-6168
John GleesonSchool of Behavioural and Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7969-492X
The University of Melbourne · AUAustralian Catholic University · AUMaresme Health Consortium · ESOrygen · AUOrygen Youth Health · AUUniversity of Calgary · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMental ill-health is the leading cause of disability worldwide. Moreover, 75% of mental health conditions emerge between the ages of 12 and 25 years. Unfortunately, due to lack of resources and limited engagement with services, a majority of young people affected by mental ill-health do not access evidence-based support. To address this gap, our team has developed a multimodal, scalable digital mental health service (Enhanced Moderated Online Social Therapy [MOST+]) merging real-time, clinician-delivered web chat counseling; interactive user-directed online therapy; expert and peer moderation; and peer-to-peer social networking.

objectiveThe primary aim of this study is to ascertain the feasibility, acceptability, and safety of MOST+. The secondary aims are to assess pre-post changes in clinical, psychosocial, and well-being outcomes and to explore the correlations between system use, perceived helpfulness, and secondary outcome variables.

methodsOverall, 157 young people seeking help from a national youth e-mental health service were recruited over 5 weeks. MOST+ was active for 9 weeks. All participants had access to interactive online therapy and integrated web chat counseling. Additional access to peer-to-peer social networking was granted to 73 participants (46.5%) for whom it was deemed safe. The intervention was evaluated via an uncontrolled single-group study.

resultsOverall, 93 participants completed the follow-up assessment. Most participants had moderate (52/157, 33%) to severe (96/157, 61%) mental health conditions. All a priori feasibility, acceptability, and safety criteria were met. Participants provided mean scores of ≥3.5 (out of 5) on ease of use (mean 3.7, SD 1.1), relevancy (mean 3.9, SD 1.0), helpfulness (mean 3.5, SD 0.9), and overall experience (mean 3.9, SD 0.8). Moreover, 98% (91/93) of participants reported a positive experience using MOST+, 82% (70/93) reported that using MOST+ helped them feel better, 86% (76/93) felt more socially connected using it, and 92% (86/93) said they would recommend it to others. No serious adverse events or inappropriate use were detected, and 97% (90/93) of participants reported feeling safe. There were statistically significant improvements in 8 of the 11 secondary outcomes assessed: psychological distress (d=-0.39; P<.001), perceived stress (d=-0.44; P<.001), psychological well-being (d=0.51; P<.001), depression (d=-0.29; P<.001), loneliness (d=-0.23; P=.04), social support (d=0.30; P<.001), autonomy (d=0.36; P=.001), and self-competence (d=0.30; P<.001). There were significant correlations between system use, perceived helpfulness, and a number of secondary outcome variables.

conclusionsMOST+ is a feasible, acceptable, and safe online clinical service for young people with mental ill-health. The high level of perceived helpfulness, the significant improvements in secondary outcomes, and the correlations between indicators of system use and secondary outcome variables provide initial support for the therapeutic potential of MOST+. MOST+ is a promising and scalable platform to deliver standalone e-mental health services as well as enhance the growing international network of face-to-face youth mental health services.

Indexed as

Social SupportAdolescentAdultChildCounselingFemaleHumansMaleMental DisordersMental Health ServicesPilot ProjectsTelemedicineYoung Adultinternet-based interventionmHealthmobile phonesocial mediasocial networkingyouth

Identifiers

PMID32788151
PMCPMC7453330
OpenAlexW3035464488

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.