ArticlePLOS digital health2026
Impact of mobile health interventions for mental health literacy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Article in PLOS digital 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mental health literacy (MHL) - the ability to recognize, manage, and prevent mental health problems - is a key determinant of mental health. Mobile health (mHealth) interventions, delivered via portable digital devices such as smartphones, offer scalable, interactive, and user-tailored approaches to improve MHL. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of mHealth interventions on MHL outcomes, compared to control conditions (non-mHealth interventions, waitlist, or no intervention). This systematic review and meta-analysis searched five databases for randomized controlled trials published between January 1, 2010, and April 18, 2025. Eligible studies enrolled participants aged 12 and older and compared mHealth interventions to control groups. Two reviewers independently screened articles, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. The primary outcome was MHL, assessed using standardized mean differences (SMD) for overall MHL and its components: knowledge, help-seeking, and stigma. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted. Out of 5,043 records identified, 14 RCTs met all inclusion criteria, encompassing 4,314 participants. mHealth interventions showed higher overall MHL (SMD = 0.13, 95% CI: 0.03-0.23), knowledge (SMD = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.09-0.37), and help-seeking (SMD = 0.26, 95% CI: 0.04-0.47; p = 0.019), compared to controls. High heterogeneity was detected (I² = 93.6%; τ² = 0.03; p < 0.001). Two studies were rated at high risk of bias; the remainder had at least some concerns. mHealth interventions modestly improved MHL outcomes, particularly knowledge and help-seeking. Although the effect sizes were small and heterogeneity was high, these interventions may offer meaningful public health value when delivered at scale.
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.