Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40098003›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2025

How theories, models, and frameworks have been used to implement digital health interventions in services for people with severe mental health problems: a scoping review.

Hannah Ball, Emily Eisner, Jennifer Nicholas, Paul Wilson, Sandra Bucci

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Enhancing Resilience and Connection: SigBeeHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  8. 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

5 authors.

Hannah BallDivision of Psychology and Mental Health, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Sciences, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Emily EisnerDivision of Psychology and Mental Health, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Sciences, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Jennifer NicholasOrygen, Melbourne, Australia.
Paul WilsonCentre for Primary Care and Health Services Research, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Sandra BucciDivision of Psychology and Mental Health, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Sciences, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. sandra.bucci@manchester.ac.uk.

Funding

Manchester Biomedical Research Centre 203308National Institute for Health and Care Research 300794
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDigital health interventions have the potential to improve the efficacy and accessibility of mental health services for people with severe mental health problems, but their integration into routine practice is a challenge. The real-world implementation of digital health interventions should be considered alongside digital intervention development. However, little is known about the quality of implementation research in this area, including the extent to which implementation science theories, models and frameworks are used. The aim of this review was to synthesise evidence regarding the application of theories, models and frameworks in research investigating the implementation of digital health interventions in services for people with severe mental health problems. Secondary aims were to consider the contexts within which studies had been undertaken and the degree of service user involvement in this research.

methodsA scoping review method was employed. Electronic databases were systematically searched for published papers in English and reference lists of included studies were hand searched. Included studies used an implementation science theory, model, or framework to understand, guide or evaluate the implementation of digital health interventions in services for people with severe mental health problems.

resultsTwelve eligible studies were identified. Studies were primarily undertaken in community mental health services with staff participants and there was variation in the types of digital interventions that were investigated. Eight different implementation science theories, models, and frameworks were used and were mainly employed to guide qualitative analysis. Most studies were undertaken in the early exploratory stages of implementation projects and there was little evidence regarding factors affecting the longer-term sustainment of digital health interventions in practice. Only one study reported the inclusion of service users in the design of the implementation study.

conclusionsThe use of implementation theories, models, and frameworks in efforts to implement digital health interventions in routine care for people with severe mental health problems is limited. Researchers should consider integrating such approaches throughout the research process and ensure service users are involved in this work. Further research regarding implementation processes, and the reach and sustainment of digital health interventions in routine practice, is required.

Indexed as

Implementation ScienceMental DisordersMental Health ServicesModels, TheoreticalDigital HealthHumansTelemedicineDigital health interventionsImplementation scienceScoping reviewSevere mental health problems

Identifiers

PMID40098003
PMCPMC11912717

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.