ArticleTrends in psychiatry and psychotherapy2025
Is digital psychiatry really for all? A cross-sectional analysis from two randomized clinical trials.
Article in Trends in psychiatry and psychotherapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optimizing Usability of Digital Health Interventions for Nondigitally Native Adults: A Framework-Based Approach to Develop Just-in-Time Adaptive Interventions (JITAIs) and Other Adaptations.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- Mindfulness-based eating in obesity and anxiety: a randomized controlled trial and feasibility assessment.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2026Article
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
Abstract
objectiveDigital psychiatry holds promise for expanding accessibility to mental health treatment, but concerns exist regarding its inclusivity and the potential for exacerbation of digital exclusion among vulnerable populations. This study aims to evaluate the inclusivity of digital psychiatry research and interventions, and to explore their potential to worsen digital exclusion.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional analysis of sociodemographic data from two clinical trials that utilize psychiatric online treatment modalities in Brazil. Participants were recruited nationwide through digital media platforms.
resultsThe sample comprised 224 individuals, predominantly female (95.1%) and Caucasian (71.87%) participants, with an average of 15.12 years of schooling. It was observed that White individuals were overrepresented compared to national averages (42.8%). Additionally, participants had a higher average number of years of schooling compared to the national average (10.1 years). Our analysis revealed a clear profile among psychiatric patients with access to and interest in digital interventions, predominantly younger, White, educated, and female individuals. DISCUSSION: As digital therapeutic solutions advance, ensuring their inclusivity and accessibility for vulnerable individuals is crucial. Initiatives to promote digital inclusion and reassess participant recruitment strategies are needed to effectively address digital exclusion. By adopting multifaceted approaches, digital mental health care can be made more effective and accessible to all.
Indexed as
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.