ArticleJMIR research protocols2021
The Current State and Diagnostic Accuracy of Digital Mental Health Assessment Tools for Psychiatric Disorders: Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Article in JMIR research protocols, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Redefining psychopathology in the context of digital overload: emerging disorders in the age of information saturation.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- Heart Rate Variability in Psychiatric Disorders: A Systematic Review.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2023Review
- The Current State and Validity of Digital Assessment Tools for Psychiatry: Systematic Review.JMIR mental health · 2022Review
- Digital Assessment Tools Using Animation Features to Quantify Alcohol Consumption: Systematic App Store and Literature Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Review
- Learnings from user feedback of a novel digital mental health assessment.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite the rapidly growing number of digital assessment tools for screening and diagnosing mental health disorders, little is known about their diagnostic accuracy.
objectiveThe purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to establish the diagnostic accuracy of question- and answer-based digital assessment tools for diagnosing a range of highly prevalent psychiatric conditions in the adult population.
methodsThe Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) will be used. The focus of the systematic review is guided by the population, intervention, comparator, and outcome framework (PICO). We will conduct a comprehensive systematic literature search of MEDLINE, PsychINFO, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Library, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts (ASSIA), and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) for appropriate articles published from January 1, 2005. Two authors will independently screen the titles and abstracts of identified references and select studies according to the eligibility criteria. Any inconsistencies will be discussed and resolved. The two authors will then extract data into a standardized form. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool, and a descriptive analysis and meta-analysis will summarize the diagnostic accuracy of the identified digital assessment tools.
resultsThe systematic review and meta-analysis commenced in November 2020, with findings expected by May 2021.
conclusionsThis systematic review and meta-analysis will summarize the diagnostic accuracy of question- and answer-based digital assessment tools. It will identify implications for clinical practice, areas for improvement, and directions for future research.
trial registrationPROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42020214724; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020214724. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/25382.
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.