ArticlePLOS digital health2024
Persuasive technologies design for mental and behavioral health platforms: A scoping literature review.
Article in PLOS digital health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cultural Adaptation of a Web-Based Ostomy Care Intervention for Hispanic Patients With Cancer and Caregivers: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR cancer · 2026Article
- The comfort paradox in emotional AI: how AI-mediated anxiety regulation may foster psychological dependence.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence addiction among university students in China: risk stratification, consequences, and exercise-based intervention.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- A systematic review on personalization of treatment components in IBIs for mental disorders.Internet interventions · 2025Review
- Analysis of willingness to use health management APP for female college students: application of UTAUT model based on Fogg theory.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This review investigates persuasive design frameworks within eHealth, concentrating on methodologies, their prevalence in mental and behavioral health applications, and identifying current research gaps. An extensive search was conducted across 8 databases, focusing on English publications with full text available. The search prioritized primary research articles, post-2011 applications, and eHealth platforms emphasizing treatment or support. The inclusion process was iterative, involving multiple authors, and relied on detailed criteria to ensure the relevance and contemporaneity of selected works. The final review set comprised 161 articles, providing an overview of persuasive design frameworks in eHealth. The review highlights the state of the art in the domain, emphasizing the utilization and effectiveness of these frameworks in eHealth platforms. This review details the restricted adoption of persuasive design frameworks within the field of eHealth, particularly in the mental and behavioral sectors. Predominant gaps include the scarcity of comparative evaluations, the underrepresentation of tailored interventions, and the unclear influence of persuasive components on user experience. There is a notable requirement for further scrutiny and refinement of persuasive design frameworks. Addressing these concerns promises a more substantial foundation for persuasive design in eHealth, potentially enhancing user commitment and platform efficiency.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.