Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36410111›Full record

SynthesisBehaviour research and therapy2022

Remote mental health care interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic: An umbrella review.

A B Witteveen, S Young, P Cuijpers, J L Ayuso-Mateos, C Barbui, F Bertolini, M Cabello, C Cadorin, N Downes, D Franzoi and 9 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Behaviour research and therapy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
13.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

42 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 90 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Implementing PTSD interventions for hospital nurses and physicians during COVID-19: A scoping review.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Co-production ofEuropean journal of psychotraumatology · 2025
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Responsiveness of European countries to the population mental health needs: A cross-national comparison study.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2025
    Article
  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

19 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.

A B WitteveenClinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, and WHO Collaborating Center for Research and Dissemination of Psychological Interventions, Amsterdam Public Health Institute, VU University, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Electronic address: a.b.witteveen@vu.nl.
S YoungClinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, and WHO Collaborating Center for Research and Dissemination of Psychological Interventions, Amsterdam Public Health Institute, VU University, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
P CuijpersClinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, and WHO Collaborating Center for Research and Dissemination of Psychological Interventions, Amsterdam Public Health Institute, VU University, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
J L Ayuso-MateosDepartment of Psychiatry, Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Princesa (IIS-Princesa), Madrid, Spain; Department of Psychiatry, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain; Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud Mental, CIBERSAM, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain.
C BarbuiWHO Collaborating Centre for Research and Training in Mental Health and Service Evaluation, Department of Neuroscience, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences, Section of Psychiatry, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
F BertoliniWHO Collaborating Centre for Research and Training in Mental Health and Service Evaluation, Department of Neuroscience, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences, Section of Psychiatry, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
M CabelloDepartment of Psychiatry, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain; Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud Mental, CIBERSAM, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain.
C CadorinWHO Collaborating Centre for Research and Training in Mental Health and Service Evaluation, Department of Neuroscience, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences, Section of Psychiatry, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
N DownesSorbonne Université, INSERM, Institut Pierre Louis d'Epidémiologie et de Santé Publique (IPLESP), Equipe de Recherche en Epidémiologie Sociale (ERES), Faculté de Médecine St Antoine, Paris, France.
D FranzoiClinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, and WHO Collaborating Center for Research and Dissemination of Psychological Interventions, Amsterdam Public Health Institute, VU University, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
M GasiorClinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, and WHO Collaborating Center for Research and Dissemination of Psychological Interventions, Amsterdam Public Health Institute, VU University, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
A JohnHealth Data Science, Swansea University Medical School, Swansea, UK.
M MelchiorSorbonne Université, INSERM, Institut Pierre Louis d'Epidémiologie et de Santé Publique (IPLESP), Equipe de Recherche en Epidémiologie Sociale (ERES), Faculté de Médecine St Antoine, Paris, France.
D McDaidCare Policy and Evaluation Centre, Department of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK.
C PalantzaClinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, and WHO Collaborating Center for Research and Dissemination of Psychological Interventions, Amsterdam Public Health Institute, VU University, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
M PurgatoWHO Collaborating Centre for Research and Training in Mental Health and Service Evaluation, Department of Neuroscience, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences, Section of Psychiatry, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
J Van der WaerdenSorbonne Université, INSERM, Institut Pierre Louis d'Epidémiologie et de Santé Publique (IPLESP), Equipe de Recherche en Epidémiologie Sociale (ERES), Faculté de Médecine St Antoine, Paris, France.
S WangClinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, and WHO Collaborating Center for Research and Dissemination of Psychological Interventions, Amsterdam Public Health Institute, VU University, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
M SijbrandijClinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, and WHO Collaborating Center for Research and Dissemination of Psychological Interventions, Amsterdam Public Health Institute, VU University, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
University of Verona · ITInserm · FRInstituto de Salud Carlos III · ESAmsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLLondon School of Economics and Political Science · GBSwansea University · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mitigating the COVID-19 related disruptions in mental health care services is crucial in a time of increased mental health disorders. Numerous reviews have been conducted on the process of implementing technology-based mental health care during the pandemic. The research question of this umbrella review was to examine what the impact of COVID-19 was on access and delivery of mental health services and how mental health services have changed during the pandemic. A systematic search for systematic reviews and meta-analyses was conducted up to August 12, 2022, and 38 systematic reviews were identified. Main disruptions during COVID-19 were reduced access to outpatient mental health care and reduced admissions and earlier discharge from inpatient care. In response, synchronous telemental health tools such as videoconferencing were used to provide remote care similar to pre-COVID care, and to a lesser extent asynchronous virtual mental health tools such as apps. Implementation of synchronous tools were facilitated by time-efficiency and flexibility during the pandemic but there was a lack of accessibility for specific vulnerable populations. Main barriers among practitioners and patients to use digital mental health tools were poor technological literacy, particularly when preexisting inequalities existed, and beliefs about reduced therapeutic alliance particularly in case of severe mental disorders. Absence of organizational support for technological implementation of digital mental health interventions due to inadequate IT infrastructure, lack of funding, as well as lack of privacy and safety, challenged implementation during COVID-19. Reviews were of low to moderate quality, covered heterogeneously designed primary studies and lacked findings of implementation in low- and middle-income countries. These gaps in the evidence were particularly prevalent in studies conducted early in the pandemic. This umbrella review shows that during the COVID-19 pandemic, practitioners and mental health care institutions mainly used synchronous telemental health tools, and to a lesser degree asynchronous tools to enable continued access to mental health care for patients. Numerous barriers to these tools were identified, and call for further improvements. In addition, more high quality research into comparative effectiveness and working mechanisms may improve scalability of mental health care in general and in future infectious disease outbreaks.

Indexed as

COVID-19HumansMental HealthPandemicsSystematic Reviews as TopicVideoconferencingContinuity of careCOVID-19e-mental health psychological interventionsImplementationMental health service deliveryScalability

Identifiers

PMID36410111
PMCPMC9661449
OpenAlexW4308931532

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.