ArticleEClinicalMedicine2025
Adherence and efficacy outcomes in young Australians with suicidal ideation using a self-management app and digital engagement strategy compared with a sham app: a three-arm randomised controlled trial.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Article
- Effectiveness of Mobile Applications for Suicide Prevention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
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
Background: Digital interventions are important treatment solutions for suicidal ideation, but premature disengagement is a significant threat to their effectiveness. We tested the adherence to, and efficacy of, two versions of an app-based intervention (app only, app + engagement strategy) for suicidal ideation, compared to a sham app. Methods: This was an online double-blind, three-arm parallel randomised controlled trial in Australia. Recruitment occurred between May 30 and August 8, 2023 and eligible participants were aged 17-24 years and had suicidal ideation in the prior 30 days. They were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive (i) LifeBuoy-an app which delivered third wave cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) skills, (ii) the LifeBuoy app plus a digital engagement strategy, or (iii) a sham app to minimise expectancy bias. The primary efficacy outcome was change in suicidal ideation scores, measured by the Suicidal Ideation Attributes Scale (SIDAS), at 30-, 60- and 120- days post-baseline. The primary engagement outcome was the number of app modules completed at 60-days post-baseline. The final assessment occurred on December 6, 2023. All data was analysed using intention-to-treat. This trial was registered at anzctr.org.au, trial number: ACTRN12621001247864. Findings: 692 participants were assigned (mean age: 19.9 [SD 2.5]; 70% female; intervention (combined): n-459, control: n-233). Significant reductions in ideation scores were observed in the combined intervention condition at 60- (d 0.48) and 120- (d 0.29) days after random assignment compared to the control condition. There were no differences in the number of modules completed between the intervention conditions (OR 1.10, 1.03, respectively) and no significant differences in their ideation scores at any time (ds -0.15 to 0.08). Serious adverse events (hospital presenting non-suicidal self-harm and/or suicide attempts) were reported by 6% of participants during the trial (control condition: 9%; combined intervention condition: 4%). No deaths were reported. Interpretation: A third wave CBT app helped to reduce ideation severity, however providing additional online resources to promote therapeutic engagement did not enhance these effects. Funding: This trial and MT was funded by the National Health & Medical Research Council, Matana Foundation for Young People, Alex Roth Foundation.
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.