Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36812547›Full record

ArticlePLOS digital health2022

Effectiveness of tailored digital health interventions for mental health at the workplace: A systematic review of randomised controlled trials.

Thirimon Moe-Byrne, Jessie Shepherd, Dorota Merecz-Kot, Marjo Sinokki, Päivi Naumanen, Leona Hakkaart-van Roijen, Christina Van Der Feltz-Cornelis

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS digital health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
13.6field-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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Digital Wellness Programs in the Workplace: Meta-Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025
    Review
  16. Review
  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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Thirimon Moe-ByrneDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, York, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2827-9715
Jessie ShepherdDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, York, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8373-3706
Dorota Merecz-KotInstitute of Psychology, Lodz, Lodz, Poland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8294-4309
Marjo SinokkiTurku Centre for Occupational Health, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9546-4905
Päivi NaumanenTurku Centre for Occupational Health, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2815-535X
Leona Hakkaart-van RoijenErasmus School of Health Policy and Management (ESHPM), Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Christina Van Der Feltz-CornelisDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, York, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6925-8956
University of Turku · FIUniversity of York · GBErasmus University Rotterdam · NLInstitute of Psychology · PLUniversity College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mental health problems in the workplace are common and have a considerable impact on employee wellbeing and productivity. Mental ill-health costs employers between £33 billion and £42 billion a year. According to a 2020 HSE report, roughly 2,440 per 100,000 workers in the UK were affected by work-related stress, depression, or anxiety, resulting in an estimated 17.9 million working days lost. We performed a systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the effect of tailored digital health interventions provided in the workplace aiming to improve mental health, presenteeism and absenteeism of employees. We searched several databases for RCTs published from 2000 onwards. Data were extracted into a standardised data extraction form. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Due to the heterogeneity of outcome measures, narrative synthesis was used to summarise the findings. Seven RCTs (eight publications) were included that evaluated tailored digital interventions versus waiting list control or usual care to improve physical and mental health outcomes and work productivity. The results are promising to the advantage of tailored digital interventions regarding presenteeism, sleep, stress levels, and physical symptoms related to somatisation; but less for addressing depression, anxiety, and absenteeism. Even though tailored digital interventions did not reduce anxiety and depression in the general working population, they significantly reduced depression and anxiety in employees with higher levels of psychological distress. Tailored digital interventions seem more effective in employees with higher levels of distress, presenteeism or absenteeism than in the general working population. There was high heterogeneity in outcome measures, especially for work productivity; this should be a focus of attention in future studies.

Identifiers

PMID36812547
PMCPMC9931277
OpenAlexW4307003123

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.