Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40788364›Full record

ReviewDer Nervenarzt2025

[Digital interventions for psychoses: current opportunities and challenges].

Melina Luker, Mar Rus-Calafell

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
In one paragraph

Review in Der Nervenarzt, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Melina LukerForschungs- und Behandlungszentrum für psychische Gesundheit, Fakultät für Psychologie, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Bochum, Deutschland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0009-6612-3226
Mar Rus-CalafellForschungs- und Behandlungszentrum für psychische Gesundheit, Fakultät für Psychologie, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Bochum, Deutschland. mar.rus-calafell@rub.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2293-3875

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Digital interventions (DI) are emerging as promising tools to support individuals with psychoses and complement traditional therapeutic approaches. This overview examines the usability and efficacy of recently developed DI (including virtual reality, smartphone and online interventions) designed to enhance treatment outcomes in psychoses. While emerging evidence suggests their efficacy in reducing positive, cognitive and affective symptoms in comparison to treatment as usual and other active therapies, evidence from large, controlled trials is still scarce. Further research is needed to refine intervention strategies, enhance long-term outcomes and develop implementation frameworks that ensure accessibility within routine care. Their full integration into mental health services requires sustained efforts in research, policy and clinical practice. Key remaining challenges include the design of autonomic interventions, discovery of new treatment targets relevant to patients and creating solutions for sustainable funding of these applications beyond clinical research studies.

Indexed as

Psychotic DisordersTelemedicineTherapy, Computer-AssistedEvidence-Based MedicineHumansSmartphoneTreatment OutcomeVirtual RealityEfficacyMental health servicesOutcomesPsychotherapyTechnology

Identifiers

PMID40788364
PMCPMC12411582

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.