ReviewPLOS digital health2025
Classifying the features of digital mental health interventions to inform the development of a patient decision aid.
Review in PLOS digital health, 2025. 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.
- Process Evaluation of Digital Mental Health Interventions for Psychosis: Scoping Review With Framework Synthesis.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- Social Network Factors Associated with the Intention to Use Digital Mental Health Interventions Among AANHPI Emerging Adults: Application and Integration of the Network Episode Model.Research square · 2026Article
- Designing digital mental health interventions for older adults: a scoping review.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- A Proposed Taxonomy to Holistically Classify Employee Mental Health Programs: Qualitative Taxonomy Development Study.Interactive journal of medical research · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) are a potential scalable solution to improve access to psychological support and therapies. DMHIs vary in terms of their features such as delivery systems (Websites or Apps) and function (information, monitoring, decision support or therapy) that are sensitive to the needs and preferences of users. A decision aid is warranted to empower people to make an informed preference-based choice of DMHIs. We conducted a review of features of DMHIs to embed within a patient decision aid to support shared decision-making. DMHIs, with evidence of availability in the United Kingdom (UK) at the time of the review, were identified from interactive meetings with a multi-disciplinary steering group, an online survey and interviews with adults with lived experience of using DMHIs in the UK. Eligible DMHIs targeted users age ≥16 years with a mental health condition(s), delivered through a digital system. A previous classification system for DMHIs was extended to eight dimensions (Target population; System; Function; Time; Facilitation; Duration and Intensity; and Research Evidence) to guide data extraction and synthesis of findings. Twenty four DMHIs were included in the review. More than half (n = 13, 54%) targeted people living with low mood, anxiety or depression and were primarily delivered via systems such as Apps or websites (or both). Most DMHIs offered one-way transmission of information (n = 21, 88%). Ten (42%) also had two-way communication (e.g., with a healthcare provider). Eighteen (75%) had a function of therapy, with seven and five DMHIs providing monitoring and decision support functions respectively. Most DMHIs were capable of being self-guided (n = 18,75%). Cost and access were primarily free, with some free via referral from the UK NHS or through corporate subscription for employees (n = 11). Eight (33%) DMHIs had evidence of effectiveness from randomised controlled trials. Six statements were developed to elicit user preferences on features of DMHIs: Target Population; Function; Time and Facilitation; System; Cost and Access; and Research Evidence. Preference elicitation statements have been embedded into a prototype decision aid for DMHIs, which will be subjected to acceptability and usability testing.
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.