SynthesisFrontiers in public health2026
Digital health technologies for self-identification of the risk of perinatal mental illness: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in public 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Perinatal mental illness affects up to 20% of mothers and 10% of fathers and is associated with adverse parental and child outcomes. Digital health technologies enabling self-identification of perinatal mental illness risk may improve early detection and reduce access barriers. This systematic review evaluated the effectiveness and safety of digital health technologies for self-identification of the risk of perinatal mental illness and examined social, organizational, and legal aspects relevant to their implementation. Methods: A systematic review with narrative synthesis was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 statement and Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Searches were performed in PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library, complemented by gray literature screening and hand search. Methodological quality was assessed using established appraisal tools for the primary outcomes. Results: Of 2,762 records identified, seven publications were included. Only one prospective cohort study evaluated effectiveness, showing fair to moderate agreement between digital and conventional methods, with increased risk of bias. Safety data were limited as well. Six studies consistently reported favorable user-related outcomes. No empirical evidence addressed organizational or legal implementation aspects. Discussion: Despite consistently positive user-related findings, robust evidence on effectiveness, safety, and system-level implementation is lacking. High-quality research is required before responsible integration into routine perinatal mental healthcare can be considered. Systematic review registration: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/H78YQ.
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.