ReviewBJPsych bulletin2025
Efficacy of mobile applications in treating depression: systemic review and meta-analysis.
Review in BJPsych bulletin, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
AIMS AND
methodPrevious meta-analysis of the efficacy of mobile phone applications (mHealth apps) for depression has several limitations, including high risk of bias and heterogeneity in effect sizes across studies, and gaps in understanding of variability in treatment outcomes. We aimed to provide more reliable and clinically relevant findings by conducting a systematic literature search on PubMed, Embase and PsycInfo, focusing on newer studies with minimal risk of bias.
resultsAnalysing 17 randomised controlled trials ( CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The results underscore the clinical relevance of mHealth apps as scalable and accessible tools for bridging gaps in mental healthcare. Their effectiveness across age groups highlights their potential for broad implementation, with future research needed to refine personalisation, engagement strategies and methodological rigour.
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.