Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38444518›Full record

ReviewDigital health

Barriers and facilitators to acceptance and implementation of eMental-health intervention among older adults: A qualitative systematic review.

Ruotong Peng, Xiaoyang Li, Yongzhen Guo, Hongting Ning, Jundan Huang, Dian Jiang, Hui Feng, Qingcai Liu

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

8 authors.

Ruotong PengXiangya School of Nursing, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5550-4853
Xiaoyang LiXiangya School of Nursing, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Yongzhen GuoXiangya School of Nursing, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Hongting NingXiangya School of Nursing, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Jundan HuangXiangya School of Nursing, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Dian JiangXiangya School of Nursing, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Hui FengXiangya School of Nursing, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Qingcai LiuXiangya School of Nursing, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Electronic mental health interventions are effective but not well promoted currently among older adults. This study sought to systematically review and summarize the barriers and facilitators of accepting and implementing electronic mental health interventions among older adults. Methods: We comprehensively retrieved six electronic databases from January 2012 to September 2022: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, PsycINFO, and CINAHL. The JBI-QARI was used to assess the quality of the research methodology of each publication. Eligible studies underwent data coding and synthesis aligned to inductive and deductive methods. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research 2.0 was used as a deductive framework to guide a more structured analysis. Results: The systematic review screened 4309 articles, 17 of which were included (eight with mixed methods and nine with qualitative methods). We identified and extracted the barriers and facilitators of accepting and implementing electronic mental health interventions among older adults: (1) innovation: technology challenges, optimized functions, and contents, security and privacy; (2) outer setting: community engagement and partnerships, financing; (3) inner setting: leadership engagement, available resources, incompatibility, intergenerational support, training and guidance; (4) individuals: perceptions, capability, motivation of older adults and healthcare providers; and (5) implementation process: recruit, external assistance, and team. Conclusion: These findings are critical to optimizing, promoting, and expanding electronic mental health interventions among older adults. The systematic review also provides a reference for better evidence-based implementation strategies in the future.

Indexed as

barrierseMental healthfacilitatorsolder adultsqualitative systematic review

Identifiers

PMID38444518
PMCPMC10913496

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.