Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35970325›Full record

SynthesisJournal of affective disorders2022

Online psychosocial interventions for improving mental health in people during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Zhiyu Ye, Wentian Li, Ruizi Zhu

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of affective disorders, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Adapting Cognitive Remediation Group Therapy Online: Focus Groups with People Aging with HIV.Journal of the International Association of Providers of AIDS Care
    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

3 authors.

Zhiyu YeSchool of Education Research, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan, China; Research Center for Psychological and Health Sciences, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan, China.
Wentian LiSchool of Education Research, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan, China; Wuhan Mental Health Centre, Wuhan, China. Electronic address: liwentian2018@163.com.
Ruizi ZhuQueen's University, Kingston, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, interventions for public mental health were mostly delivered through online modalities. Although many studies have explored the effectiveness of online psychosocial interventions through randomized controlled trials, there is a lack of quantitative synthesis of the effectiveness of online psychosocial interventions and an examination of their overall application.

objectiveTo understand the commonly used psychosocial interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic and the effectiveness of the interventions.

methodsRisk bias was assessed in the included studies according to the Cochrane Collaboration criteria, and data from post-test and follow-up were combined for standardized mean differences using Stata 16.0 software, and sources of heterogeneity were explored by subgroup analysis, and risk bias was assessed in the included studies using Review Manager 5.4 software. The study was written in strict accordance with PRISMA specifications, and registration was completed on the PROSPERO platform (CRD42022302917).

resultsThe online psychosocial intervention had an ameliorating effect on anxiety (SMD = -0.78), depression (SMD = -0.80), and insomnia (SMD = -0.19) in the public during the COVID-19 pandemic, was ineffective for the intervention on stress, and the effectiveness of the intervention on depression continued at follow-up. Subgroup analyses showed that the type of intervention, intervention form, Duration of intervention, and setting of the control group influenced the trial results to some extent, with cognitive behavioral therapy being the most effective intervention for anxiety and depressive symptoms, self-help interventions being more effective than interventions with therapist interventions, and 1-4 week interventions being more effective than 5-8 week interventions. Due to the limited number of studies included in the analysis and variability in quality, more randomized controlled trials are needed to test the findings.

conclusionOnline psychosocial interventions can be effective in improving symptoms of anxiety, depression, stress, and insomnia in the public during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, additional randomized controlled trial studies are needed to determine which types of interventions are more appropriate for which populations and how they can be implemented to achieve better intervention outcomes.

Indexed as

COVID-19Sleep Initiation and Maintenance DisordersDepressionHumansMental HealthPandemicsPsychosocial InterventionCOVID-19 pandemicMental healthOnline psychosocial intervention

Identifiers

PMID35970325
PMCPMC9373538

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.