Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33732626›Full record

ReviewInternet interventions2021

Efficacy of digital health interventions in youth with chronic medical conditions: A meta-analysis.

Matthias Domhardt, Annalena Schröder, Agnes Geirhos, Lena Steubl, Harald Baumeister

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Internet interventions, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Matthias DomhardtDepartment of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Institute of Psychology and Education, Ulm University, Germany.
Annalena SchröderDepartment of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Institute of Psychology and Education, Ulm University, Germany.
Agnes GeirhosDepartment of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Institute of Psychology and Education, Ulm University, Germany.
Lena SteublDepartment of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Institute of Psychology and Education, Ulm University, Germany.
Harald BaumeisterDepartment of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Institute of Psychology and Education, Ulm University, Germany.
Universität Ulm · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDigital health interventions might extend service provisions for youth with chronic medical conditions (CC) and comorbid mental health symptoms. We aimed to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy of Internet- and mobile-based interventions (IMIs) for different psychological and disease-related outcomes in children and adolescents with CC.

methodStudies were identified by systematic searches in CENTRAL, Embase, MEDLINE/PubMed and PsycINFO, complemented by searches in reference lists of eligible studies and other reviews. We included studies, when they were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of an IMI to control conditions in improving psychological and disease-related outcomes in youth (mean age ≤ 18 years) with CC. Study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were conducted independently by two reviewers. Meta-analyses were performed within a random-effects model, and Hedges'

resultsA total of 19 randomized controlled trials (2410 patients) were included in this meta-analysis. IMIs were associated with improvements in self-efficacy (

conclusionThe available evidence on IMIs for improving mental and health-related outcomes in youth with CC is limited. Our findings point to a rather small benefit and limited efficacy. Future research is needed, to comprehensively assess the potential of IMIs to extend collaborative care, and to identify factors contributing to improved user-centered interventions with better treatment outcomes.

Indexed as

Adolescent mental healtheHealthInternet- and mobile-based interventionmHealthPediatricsPsychotherapy

Identifiers

PMID33732626
PMCPMC7941178
OpenAlexW3129218224

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.