Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42096354›Full record

SynthesisJMIR human factors2026

Persuasive Systems Design Features of Smartphone Apps for Psychosis: Systematic Review.

Theresa Taylor, Jasmin Peat, David Kell, Shadi Daryan, Pamela Jacobsen

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JMIR human factors, 2026. 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

5 authors.

Theresa TaylorDepartment of Psychology, University of Bath, Claverton Down, Bath, BA2 7AY, United Kingdom, +44 1225 383843.ORCID 0000-0003-3427-4256
Jasmin PeatDepartment of Psychology, University of Bath, Claverton Down, Bath, BA2 7AY, United Kingdom, +44 1225 383843.ORCID 0009-0009-2331-2844
David KellDepartment of Psychology, University of Bath, Claverton Down, Bath, BA2 7AY, United Kingdom, +44 1225 383843.ORCID 0009-0001-3478-1795
Shadi DaryanDepartment of Psychology, University of Bath, Claverton Down, Bath, BA2 7AY, United Kingdom, +44 1225 383843.ORCID 0000-0003-1634-373X
Pamela JacobsenDepartment of Psychology, University of Bath, Claverton Down, Bath, BA2 7AY, United Kingdom, +44 1225 383843.ORCID 0000-0001-8847-7775

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: It is unclear why some smartphone apps designed for people with psychosis are engaging, while others are not. One possible explanation is the apps' persuasive features and the operationalization and implementation of these features. Objective: This systematic review set out to quantify and describe the persuasive features used in smartphone apps for psychosis, investigate whether there was any association between persuasive features and attrition or adherence rates. and document the quality of the included apps. Methods: We searched electronic databases PsycINFO, PubMed, and Google Scholar for eligible papers published between the years of 2013 and 2025. Hand searches of reference lists were completed. Apps were selected if they were designed for people with psychosis and there were published empirical studies investigating the apps. Two reviewers from the review team (TT, JP, DK, and SD) independently screened papers and extracted data on adherence and attrition, as well as coded papers for evidence of persuasive features according to the persuasive systems design (PSD) model. Available data were synthesized descriptively and narratively. We attempted to access apps via app stores or by correspondence with the research team. Results: We found 22 apps for psychosis, with 30 associated published papers. The persuasive features were as follows: personalization (18 apps); reminders (15 apps); suggestions (11 apps); tunneling and self-monitoring (10 apps); reduction (9 apps); liking (8 apps); social role (6 apps); rehearsal, praise, and similarity (5 apps); rewards (4 apps); simulation, real-world feel, and social learning (3 apps); surface credibility and normative influence (2 apps); and trustworthiness, social comparison, and social facilitation (1 app). Expertise, authority, third-party endorsements, verifiability, cooperation, competition, and recognition were present in zero apps. Features in the categories of primary task support and dialogue support were well represented, while social support and system credibility support were underused. It was found that there was no association between the number of persuasive features and attrition; an association between persuasive features and adherence could not be assessed. The quality of the apps could not be judged due to 20 of the 22 apps being inaccessible either through the research papers' authors or through app stores. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that in psychosis apps there is potential to include a broader range of persuasive features, which might maximize engagement. Psychosis apps may benefit from incorporating more features that leverage the persuasive impact of having users interact (social support) and incorporating features that emphasize system credibility and trustworthiness. Further studies could determine whether an increase in the number of persuasive features will impact app engagement and which features are most impactful in this context.

Indexed as

Mobile ApplicationsPersuasive CommunicationPsychotic DisordersSmartphoneHumansapphuman computer interactionmhealthpersuasive systems designpsychosisschizophreniasmartphone app

Identifiers

PMID42096354
PMCPMC13151958

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.