Theresa Sextl-Plötz , Maria Steinhoff , Harald Baumeister , Pim Cuijpers , David D. Ebert , Anna-Carlotta Zarski
{"title":"A systematic review of predictors and moderators of treatment outcomes in internet- and mobile-based interventions for depression","authors":"Theresa Sextl-Plötz , Maria Steinhoff , Harald Baumeister , Pim Cuijpers , David D. Ebert , Anna-Carlotta Zarski","doi":"10.1016/j.invent.2024.100760","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This systematic review aimed to synthesize evidence on predictors and moderators of treatment outcomes in internet- and mobile-based interventions (IMIs) for depression, informing personalized care. A systematic search across PubMed, PsycInfo, and Cochrane yielded 33,002 results. Two reviewers independently performed screening, data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and methodological quality evaluation. Fifty-eight single studies (m = 466 analyses) focusing on baseline-predictors (59.7 %, m = 278), process-predictors (16.5 %, m = 77), and moderators (21.9 %, m = 102), and six individual patient data meta-analyses (m = 93) were included. Only 24.0 % (m = 112/466) of analyses in single studies and 15.1 % (m = 14/93) in individual patient data meta-analyses were significant. Evidence from single studies was rated as insufficient for all variable categories with only 2 out of 40 categories showing >50 % significant results. Baseline depression severity had the strongest predictive value with higher scores linked to better outcomes followed by variables indicative for the course-of-change. Other frequently analyzed and potentially relevant variables with significant results were adherence, age, educational level, ethnicity, relationship status, treatment history, and behavioral variables. More high quality quantitative studies with sufficient power are essential to validate and expand findings, identifying predictors and moderators specifically relevant in IMIs to explain differential treatment effects.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48615,"journal":{"name":"Internet Interventions-The Application of Information Technology in Mental and Behavioural Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214782924000538/pdfft?md5=7ff7e4c3fd471bcb079a725a117415e0&pid=1-s2.0-S2214782924000538-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Internet Interventions-The Application of Information Technology in Mental and Behavioural Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214782924000538","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This systematic review aimed to synthesize evidence on predictors and moderators of treatment outcomes in internet- and mobile-based interventions (IMIs) for depression, informing personalized care. A systematic search across PubMed, PsycInfo, and Cochrane yielded 33,002 results. Two reviewers independently performed screening, data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and methodological quality evaluation. Fifty-eight single studies (m = 466 analyses) focusing on baseline-predictors (59.7 %, m = 278), process-predictors (16.5 %, m = 77), and moderators (21.9 %, m = 102), and six individual patient data meta-analyses (m = 93) were included. Only 24.0 % (m = 112/466) of analyses in single studies and 15.1 % (m = 14/93) in individual patient data meta-analyses were significant. Evidence from single studies was rated as insufficient for all variable categories with only 2 out of 40 categories showing >50 % significant results. Baseline depression severity had the strongest predictive value with higher scores linked to better outcomes followed by variables indicative for the course-of-change. Other frequently analyzed and potentially relevant variables with significant results were adherence, age, educational level, ethnicity, relationship status, treatment history, and behavioral variables. More high quality quantitative studies with sufficient power are essential to validate and expand findings, identifying predictors and moderators specifically relevant in IMIs to explain differential treatment effects.
期刊介绍:
Official Journal of the European Society for Research on Internet Interventions (ESRII) and the International Society for Research on Internet Interventions (ISRII).
The aim of Internet Interventions is to publish scientific, peer-reviewed, high-impact research on Internet interventions and related areas.
Internet Interventions welcomes papers on the following subjects:
• Intervention studies targeting the promotion of mental health and featuring the Internet and/or technologies using the Internet as an underlying technology, e.g. computers, smartphone devices, tablets, sensors
• Implementation and dissemination of Internet interventions
• Integration of Internet interventions into existing systems of care
• Descriptions of development and deployment infrastructures
• Internet intervention methodology and theory papers
• Internet-based epidemiology
• Descriptions of new Internet-based technologies and experiments with clinical applications
• Economics of internet interventions (cost-effectiveness)
• Health care policy and Internet interventions
• The role of culture in Internet intervention
• Internet psychometrics
• Ethical issues pertaining to Internet interventions and measurements
• Human-computer interaction and usability research with clinical implications
• Systematic reviews and meta-analysis on Internet interventions