Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34666306›Full record

ArticleJMIR mental health2021

The Application of e-Mental Health in Response to COVID-19: Scoping Review and Bibliometric Analysis.

Louise A Ellis, Isabelle Meulenbroeks, Kate Churruca, Chiara Pomare, Sarah Hatem, Reema Harrison, Yvonne Zurynski, Jeffrey Braithwaite

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mental health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. E-Mental Health Interventions in Inpatient Care: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

8 authors.

Louise A EllisCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6902-4578
Isabelle MeulenbroeksCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9083-7845
Kate ChurrucaCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9923-3116
Chiara PomareCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9118-7207
Sarah HatemCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3542-6138
Reema HarrisonCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8609-9827
Yvonne ZurynskiCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7744-8717
Jeffrey BraithwaiteCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0296-4957

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic and its mitigation measures and impacts, such as shelter-in-place orders, social isolation, restrictions on freedoms, unemployment, financial insecurity, and disrupted routines, have led to declines in mental health worldwide and concomitant escalating demands for mental health services. Under the circumstances, electronic mental health (e-mental health) programs and services have rapidly become the "new normal."

objectiveThe aim of this study was to assess key characteristics and evidence gaps in the e-mental health literature published in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic via a scoping review and bibliometric analysis.

methodsWe conducted a search of four academic databases (ie, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, and CINAHL) for documents published from December 31, 2019, to March 31, 2021, using keywords for e-mental health and COVID-19. Article information was extracted that was relevant to the review objective, including journal, type of article, keywords, focus, and corresponding author. Information was synthesized by coding these attributes and was then summarized through descriptive statistics and narrative techniques. Article influence was examined from Altmetric and CiteScore data, and a network analysis was conducted on article keywords.

resultsA total of 356 publications were included in the review. Articles on e-mental health quickly thrived early in the pandemic, with most articles being nonempirical, chiefly commentaries or opinions (n=225, 63.2%). Empirical publications emerged later and became more frequent as the pandemic progressed. The United States contributed the most articles (n=160, 44.9%), though a notable number came from middle-income countries (n=59, 16.6%). Articles were spread across 165 journals and had above-average influence (ie, almost half of the articles were in the top 25% of output scores by Altmetric, and the average CiteScore across articles was 4.22). The network analysis of author-supplied keywords identified key topic areas, including specific mental disorders, eHealth modalities, issues and challenges, and populations of interest. These were further explored via full-text analysis. Applications of e-mental health during the pandemic overcame, or were influenced by, system, service, technology, provider, and patient factors.

conclusionsCOVID-19 has accelerated applications of e-mental health. Further research is needed to support the implementation of e-mental health across system and service infrastructures, alongside evidence of the relative effectiveness of e-mental health in comparison to traditional modes of care.

Indexed as

bibliometricsCOVID-19e-mental healthhealth systemsmental health

Identifiers

PMID34666306
PMCPMC8651237

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.