ArticleBMJ mental health2026
Building evidence on digital psychotherapies for adults living with depression: a systematic scoping review of populations, interventions and design features of ongoing and planned randomised controlled trials.
Article in BMJ mental health, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDigital psychotherapies may offer scalable options for depression, but most randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are at moderate or high risk of bias. Mapping the methodologies, populations, interventions and outcomes of completed, ongoing and terminated/withdrawn RCTs of digital psychotherapies for depression could help anticipate future evidence gaps and redundancies. STUDY SELECTION AND ANALYSIS: We conducted a systematic scoping review of RCTs registered in the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, European Union Clinical Trials Register and European Union Clinical Trials Information System between 2018 and 2025. Eligible RCTs evaluated digital psychotherapies for adults with depressive disorders, bipolar depression or depressive symptoms. Extracted data encompass methodological features, population characteristics, settings, description of intervention, control, funders, registration timing and reporting practices.
findingsAmong the 681 RCTs, 51.8% were completed, 34.1% published their results, 78.1% were prospectively registered and 8.5% were industry funded. Multicentre RCTs accounted for 23.1%, with 42.9% being planned in the USA, Germany or Canada and 25.1% recruiting in low- or middle-income countries. Inclusion relied on self-reported symptoms only for 61.5% and suicidal ideation was an exclusion criterion in 61.8%. The most frequent type of digital psychotherapy was cognitive-behavioural therapy for 64.6%. Human support was a component of the intervention in 44.2%. Chatbots were assessed by 4.6%. Waitlist control was used in 21%, with 49.3% of RCTs being open-label. The most frequent primary outcome was the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 for 35.7%.
conclusionStrengthening future evidence on digital psychotherapies requires timely dissemination of results, use of active controls, diversifying assessed psychotherapies and studying efficacy in populations with limited access to psychotherapy.
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.