Evaluation of the Use of Digital Mental Health Platforms and Interventions: Scoping Review

Luke Balcombe and Diego De Leo ()
Additional contact information
Luke Balcombe: Australian Institute for Suicide Research and Prevention, School of Applied Psychology, Griffith University, Messines Ridge Road, Mount Gravatt, QLD 4122, Australia
Diego De Leo: Australian Institute for Suicide Research and Prevention, School of Applied Psychology, Griffith University, Messines Ridge Road, Mount Gravatt, QLD 4122, Australia

IJERPH, 2022, vol. 20, issue 1, 1-23

Abstract: Background: The increasing use of digital mental health (DMH) platforms and digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) is hindered by uncertainty over effectiveness, quality and usability. There is a need to identify the types of available evidence in this domain. Aim: This study is a scoping review identifying evaluation of the (1) DMH platform/s used; and (2) DMHI/s applied on the DMH platform/s. Methods: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guided the review process. Empirical studies that focused on evaluation of the use and application of DMH platforms were included from journal articles (published 2012–2022). A literature search was conducted using four electronic databases (Scopus, ScienceDirect, Sage and ACM Digital Library) and two search engines (PubMed and Google Scholar). Results: A total of 6874 nonduplicate records were identified, of which 144 were analyzed and 22 met the inclusion criteria. The review included general/unspecified mental health and/or suicidality indications ( n = 9, 40.9%), followed by depression ( n = 5, 22.7%), psychosis ( n = 3, 13.6%), anxiety and depression ( n = 2, 9.1%), as well as anxiety, depression and suicidality ( n = 1, 4.5%), loneliness ( n = 1, 4.5%), and addiction ( n = 1, 4.5%). There were 11 qualitative studies (50%), 8 quantitative studies (36.4%), and 3 mixed-methods studies ( n = 3, 13.6%). The results contained 11 studies that evaluated the DMH platform/s and 11 studies that evaluated the DMHI/s. The studies focused on feasibility, usability, engagement, acceptability and effectiveness. There was a small amount of significant evidence (1 in each 11), notably the (cost-)effectiveness of a DMHI with significant long-term impact on anxiety and depression in adults. Conclusion: The empirical research demonstrates the feasibility of DMH platforms and DMHIs. To date, there is mostly heterogeneous, preliminary evidence for their effectiveness, quality and usability. However, a scalable DMHI reported effectiveness in treating adults’ anxiety and depression. The scope of effectiveness may be widened through targeted strategies, for example by engaging independent young people.

Keywords: mental health care; suicide prevention; digital mental health platforms; digital mental health interventions; evaluation; targeted strategies (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/1/362/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/1/362/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2022:i:1:p:362-:d:1015400

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().