ArticleCommunity mental health journal2026
A Scoping Review of Technology/Digital Support Tools for Informal Mental Health Carers: Impacts on Well being and Experience.
Article in Community mental health journal, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionInformal carers provide essential support to individuals with mental health conditions, yet often experience poor well being and limited access to traditional supports due to stigma, time constraints, and geographic barriers. Self-accessible digital tools may offer a flexible and scalable solution. This scoping review explores the impact of self-accessible digital support tools on the well being and experience of informal carers of individuals with mental health conditions.
methodsFive databases were searched for peer-reviewed studies (2015-2025) evaluating digital tools for carers of individuals with mental health conditions, excluding neurocognitive disorders. Nine studies met the inclusion criteria and were assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.
resultsSeven unique digital tools were identified (three mobile apps, four web-based tools). Professionally developed tools appeared to be associated with greater improvements in caregiver burden, emotional regulation, and quality of life. Codesigned digital tools were positively received for their flexibility and relevance, but had mixed clinical outcomes and engagement challenges. DISCUSSION: Findings suggest that while digital tools can benefit carers, digital literacy, usability, and sustained engagement are critical factors. Codesign alone does not guarantee improved outcomes, particularly when user involvement is limited or underreported. Future research should further investigate codesigned interventions, with clear reporting of development processes and strategies that promote sustained use.
conclusionDigital interventions can enhance the well being and experience of informal mental health carers, particularly those that are codesigned and multifactorial to address carer needs. Strengthening these tools has the potential to support carers and reduce systemic strain on mental health services.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42159940What 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.