SynthesisBMJ open2024
Persuasive design principle of social support in digital interventions targeting mental health symptoms: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impacts of digital third-wave interventions for adults on wellbeing and mental health outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Leveraging expectation effects to improve outcomes in the context of digital mental health interventions.Internet interventions · 2026Review
- Persuasive Design in a Digital Mindfulness Intervention: A Randomized Trial of a Skill-Based Achievement System and Automated Peer Encouragement.Journal of healthcare informatics research · 2026Article
- Transforming Mental Health for Transgender and Gender-Diverse Young Adults Using Interventions to Drive Equity (TransHealthGUIDE): Protocol for a Digital Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the available evidence on efficacy of social support strategies, as defined by the persuasive system design framework, in internet-based and mobile-based interventions (IMI) targeting mental health.
designSystematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Randomised controlled trials comparing IMI implementing a social support strategy for mental health symptoms to various control conditions. Publications up to June 2023 (date of search 6 June 2023) were considered. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers screened and extracted data in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Risk of bias was assessed with the Risk of Bias Tool V.2.0. Data were pooled based on a random-effects model.
resultsAfter screening 6484 records, a total of 45 studies met our inclusion criteria. At 96%, social support was predominantly implemented through the strategy of social facilitation, by which users recognising others using the intervention (eg, discussion forum). IMI implementing social support strategies showed moderate effect sizes of Hedges'
conclusionsBased on a small number of component studies, implementing social support strategies in IMI that target mental health symptoms has no significant incremental benefit on effectiveness. To draw more robust conclusions, the potential of other social support strategies besides social facilitation should be exploited in future component studies. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020222810.
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.