Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39040128›Full record

ReviewGeneral psychiatry2024

Assessing the effectiveness of internet-based interventions for mental health outcomes: an umbrella review.

Mi Zhang, Chuan Fan, Lijun Ma, Huixue Wang, Zhenyue Zu, Linxi Yang, Fenglan Chen, Wenzhuo Wei, Xiaoming Li

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in General psychiatry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Innovations to improve outcomes and uptake of psychotherapies for mental disorders: a state-of-the-art review.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

9 authors.

Mi ZhangResearch Centre for Translational Medicine, the Second Affiliated Hospital, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, China.
Chuan FanDepartment of Psychiatry, the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, China.
Lijun MaDepartment of Medical Psychology, School of Mental Health and Psychological Science, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, China.
Huixue WangDepartment of Medical Psychology, School of Mental Health and Psychological Science, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, China.
Zhenyue ZuDepartment of Medical Psychology, School of Mental Health and Psychological Science, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, China.
Linxi YangDepartment of Medical Psychology, School of Mental Health and Psychological Science, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, China.
Fenglan ChenDepartment of Medical Psychology, School of Mental Health and Psychological Science, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, China.
Wenzhuo WeiDepartment of Medical Psychology, School of Mental Health and Psychological Science, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, China.
Xiaoming LiResearch Centre for Translational Medicine, the Second Affiliated Hospital, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, China.ORCID 0000-0002-5228-1372

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Internet-based interventions (IBIs) for behavioural health have been prevalent for over two decades, and a growing proportion of individuals with mental health concerns prefer these emerging digital alternatives. However, the effectiveness and acceptability of IBIs for various mental health disorders continue to be subject to scholarly debate. We performed an umbrella review of meta-analyses (MAs), conducting literature searches in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane and Ovid Medline from their inception to 17 January 2023. A total of 87 MAs, reporting on 1683 randomised controlled trials and 295 589 patients, were included. The results indicated that IBIs had a moderate effect on anxiety disorder (standardised mean difference (SMD)=0.53, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.62) and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (SMD=0.63, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.89). In contrast, the efficacy on depression (SMD=0.45, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.52), addiction (SMD=0.23, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.31), suicidal ideation (SMD=0.23, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.30), stress (SMD=0.41, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.48) and obsessive-compulsive disorder (SMD=0.47, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.73) was relatively small. However, no significant effects were observed for personality disorders (SMD=0.07, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.26). Our findings suggest a significant association between IBIs and improved mental health outcomes, with particular effectiveness noted in treating anxiety disorders and PTSD. However, it is noteworthy that the effectiveness of IBIs was impacted by high dropout rates during treatment. Furthermore, our results indicated that guided IBIs proved to be more effective than unguided ones, playing a positive role in reducing dropout rates and enhancing patient adherence rates. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42023417366.

Indexed as

Mental HealthPsychotherapy

Identifiers

PMID39040128
PMCPMC11261690

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.