ArticleDer Nervenarzt2025
[Scoping review on the identification and evaluation of available digital applications for bipolar disorder].
Article in Der Nervenarzt, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Determinants of Digital Health Resource Utilization Among Individuals With Self-Reported Bipolar Disorder in Germany-A Cross-Sectional Study Based on the Andersen Model.Bipolar disorders · 2026Article
- Digital health literacy among people with bipolar disorder in Germany - a cross-sectional survey.Frontiers in psychiatry · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBipolar disorders require long-term monitoring. Digital applications, such as smartphone apps, offer potential for self-management and early detection but there are uncertainties regarding availability, guideline conformity and evidence. In Germany, specific digital health applications (DiGAs) for bipolar disorders are lacking, highlighting regulatory and healthcare delivery challenges.
aimThis review examines apps for bipolar disorder available in Germany with respect to their functions, availability and evidence base. MATERIAL AND
methodsBetween January and March 2025 a systematic search was conducted in the databases MindApps.org and MindTools.io for apps. Functions, research evidence, languages, cost models, and app-store availability were recorded. Additionally, scientific studies on the identified apps were reviewed.
resultsA total of 18 apps were identified 11 of which are specifically for bipolar disorders. The functions range from mood and symptom tracking to psychoeducational contents. Of the apps six had published studies but none showed significant improvements in symptoms. DISCUSSION: Although digital interventions show promise for improving the treatment of bipolar disorder, large-scale, methodologically rigorous randomized controlled trials with standardized endpoints are still lacking. In Germany no DiGAs specifically designed for this patient group are currently available. Moreover, for sustainable integration into routine care of a chronic condition such as bipolar disorder, dependable reimbursement models and comprehensive long-term studies are also required.
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.