Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39298760›Full record

ReviewJournal of medical Internet research2024

We Have Spent Time, Money, and Effort Making Self-Help Digital Mental Health Interventions: Is Anyone Going to Come to the Party?

Skye Fitzpatrick, Alexander O Crenshaw, Victoria Donkin, Alexis Collins, Angela Xiang, Elizabeth A Earle, Kamya Goenka, Sonya Varma, Julianne Bushe, Tara McFadden and 2 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of medical Internet research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Observational
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

12 authors.

Skye FitzpatrickYork University, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-1347-1827
Alexander O CrenshawKennesaw State University, Kennesaw, GA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-7453-2398
Victoria DonkinUniversity of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada.ORCID 0009-0001-3587-1098
Alexis CollinsUniversity of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada.ORCID 0009-0009-6867-2173
Angela XiangUniversity of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada.ORCID 0009-0005-7116-5974
Elizabeth A EarleYork University, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-7163-1083
Kamya GoenkaYork University, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0009-0003-0479-7344
Sonya VarmaYork University, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-3574-8783
Julianne BusheUniversity of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada.ORCID 0009-0001-2770-9648
Tara McFaddenAtlas Institute for Veterans and Families, Ottawa, ON, Canada.ORCID 0009-0004-3318-2610
Andrea LibradoAtlas Institute for Veterans and Families, Ottawa, ON, Canada.ORCID 0009-0004-4952-4435
Candice MonsonUniversity of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-6179-0788

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although efficacious psychotherapies exist, a limited number of mental health care providers and significant demand make their accessibility a fundamental problem. Clinical researchers, funders, and investors alike have converged on self-help digital mental health interventions (self-help DMHIs) as a low-cost, low-burden, and broadly scalable solution to the global mental health burden. Consequently, exorbitant financial and time-based resources have been invested in developing, testing, and disseminating these interventions. However, the public's assumed desirability for self-help DMHIs by experts has largely proceeded without question. This commentary critically evaluates whether self-help DMHIs can, and will, reach their purported potential as a solution to the public burden of mental illness, with an emphasis on evaluating their real-world desirability. Our review finds that self-help DMHIs are often perceived as less desirable and credible than in-person treatments, with lower usage rates and, perhaps accordingly, clinical trials testing self-help DMHIs suffering from widespread recruitment challenges. We highlight two fundamental challenges that may be interfering with the desirability of, and engagement in, self-help DMHIs: (1) difficulty competing with technology companies that have advantages in resources, marketing, and user experience design (but may not be delivering evidence-based interventions) and (2) difficulty retaining (vs initially attracting) users. We discuss a range of potential solutions, including highlighting self-help DMHIs in public mental health awareness campaigns; public education about evidence-based interventions that can guide consumers to appropriate self-help DMHI selection; increased financial and expert support to clinical researchers for marketing, design, and user experience in self-help DMHI development; increased involvement of stakeholders in the design of self-help DMHIs; and investing in more research on ways to improve retention (versus initial engagement). We suggest that, through these efforts, self-help DMHIs may fully realize their promise for reducing the global burden of mental illness.

Indexed as

Mental DisordersHumansMental HealthMental Health ServicesSelf CareTelemedicinedigital interventionsintervention desirabilitymental healthonline interventionspsychotherapyself-help

Identifiers

PMID39298760
PMCPMC11450353

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.