Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36612685›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

Evaluation of the Use of Digital Mental Health Platforms and Interventions: Scoping Review.

Luke Balcombe, Diego De Leo

Abstract readScoping Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Designing a Culturally Adapted Perioperative Mental Health Intervention for Older Black Male Surgical Patients: A Community-Based Participatory Study.The American journal of geriatric psychiatry : official journal of the American Association for Geriatric Psychiatry · 2026
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

2 authors.

Luke BalcombeAustralian Institute for Suicide Research and Prevention, School of Applied Psychology, Griffith University, Messines Ridge Road, Mount Gravatt, QLD 4122, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6761-3659
Diego De LeoAustralian Institute for Suicide Research and Prevention, School of Applied Psychology, Griffith University, Messines Ridge Road, Mount Gravatt, QLD 4122, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8255-6480

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe increasing use of digital mental health (DMH) platforms and digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) is hindered by uncertainty over effectiveness, quality and usability. There is a need to identify the types of available evidence in this domain.

aimThis study is a scoping review identifying evaluation of the (1) DMH platform/s used; and (2) DMHI/s applied on the DMH platform/s.

methodsThe Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guided the review process. Empirical studies that focused on evaluation of the use and application of DMH platforms were included from journal articles (published 2012-2022). A literature search was conducted using four electronic databases (Scopus, ScienceDirect, Sage and ACM Digital Library) and two search engines (PubMed and Google Scholar).

resultsA total of 6874 nonduplicate records were identified, of which 144 were analyzed and 22 met the inclusion criteria. The review included general/unspecified mental health and/or suicidality indications (

conclusionThe empirical research demonstrates the feasibility of DMH platforms and DMHIs. To date, there is mostly heterogeneous, preliminary evidence for their effectiveness, quality and usability. However, a scalable DMHI reported effectiveness in treating adults' anxiety and depression. The scope of effectiveness may be widened through targeted strategies, for example by engaging independent young people.

Indexed as

Mental HealthPsychotic DisordersAdolescentAdultAnxietyAnxiety DisordersHumansQualitative Researchdigital mental health interventionsdigital mental health platformsevaluationmental health caresuicide preventiontargeted strategies

Identifiers

PMID36612685
PMCPMC9819791

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.