Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36069841›Full record

ReviewJMIR mental health2022

Effectiveness and Minimum Effective Dose of App-Based Mobile Health Interventions for Anxiety and Depression Symptom Reduction: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Sheng-Chieh Lu, Mindy Xu, Mei Wang, Angela Hardi, Abby L Cheng, Su-Hsin Chang, Po-Yin Yen

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JMIR mental health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. eHealth Literacy Interventions: Scoping Review.Interactive journal of medical research · 2025
    Review
  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

7 authors.

Sheng-Chieh LuDepartment of Symptom Research, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6685-1524
Mindy XuKeck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8413-9461
Mei WangDivision of Public Health Sciences, Department of Surgery, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, MO, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3560-9460
Angela HardiBecker Medical Library, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, MO, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5693-8979
Abby L ChengDivision of Public Health Sciences, Department of Surgery, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, MO, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8166-0806
Su-Hsin ChangDivision of Public Health Sciences, Department of Surgery, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, MO, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5872-9556
Po-Yin YenInstitute for Informatics, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, MO, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7061-4185

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMobile health (mHealth) apps offer new opportunities to deliver psychological treatments for mental illness in an accessible, private format. The results of several previous systematic reviews support the use of app-based mHealth interventions for anxiety and depression symptom management. However, it remains unclear how much or how long the minimum treatment "dose" is for an mHealth intervention to be effective. Just-in-time adaptive intervention (JITAI) has been introduced in the mHealth domain to facilitate behavior changes and is positioned to guide the design of mHealth interventions with enhanced adherence and effectiveness.

objectiveInspired by the JITAI framework, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the dose effectiveness of app-based mHealth interventions for anxiety and depression symptom reduction.

methodsWe conducted a literature search on 7 databases (ie, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, Scopus, Cochrane Library (eg, CENTRAL), ScienceDirect, and ClinicalTrials, for publications from January 2012 to April 2020. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating app-based mHealth interventions for anxiety and depression. The study selection and data extraction process followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We estimated the pooled effect size using Hedge g and appraised study quality using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for RCTs.

resultsWe included 15 studies involving 2627 participants for 18 app-based mHealth interventions. Participants in the intervention groups showed a significant effect on anxiety (Hedge g=-.10, 95% CI -0.14 to -0.06, I2=0%) but not on depression (Hedge g=-.08, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.07, I2=4%). Interventions of at least 7 weeks' duration had larger effect sizes on anxiety symptom reduction.

conclusionsThere is inconclusive evidence for clinical use of app-based mHealth interventions for anxiety and depression at the current stage due to the small to nonsignificant effects of the interventions and study quality concerns. The recommended dose of mHealth interventions and the sustainability of intervention effectiveness remain unclear and require further investigation.

Indexed as

intervention dose effectivenessmental healthmobile healthsmartphone appssystematic review and meta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID36069841
PMCPMC9494214

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.