减少青少年抑郁症状和饮酒的手机应用:系统综述和荟萃分析:系统综述

IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Campbell Systematic Reviews Pub Date : 2024-04-26 DOI:10.1002/cl2.1398
Olivia Magwood, Ammar Saad, Dominique Ranger, Kate Volpini, Franklin Rukikamirera, Rinila Haridas, Shahab Sayfi, Jeremie Alexander, Yvonne Tan, Kevin Pottie
{"title":"减少青少年抑郁症状和饮酒的手机应用:系统综述和荟萃分析:系统综述","authors":"Olivia Magwood,&nbsp;Ammar Saad,&nbsp;Dominique Ranger,&nbsp;Kate Volpini,&nbsp;Franklin Rukikamirera,&nbsp;Rinila Haridas,&nbsp;Shahab Sayfi,&nbsp;Jeremie Alexander,&nbsp;Yvonne Tan,&nbsp;Kevin Pottie","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1398","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Among youth, symptoms of depression, anxiety, and alcohol use are associated with considerable illness and disability. Youth face many personal and health system barriers in accessing mental health care. Mobile applications (apps) offer youth potentially accessible, scalable, and anonymous therapy and other support. Recent systematic reviews on apps to reduce mental health symptoms among youth have reported uncertain effectiveness, but analyses based on the type of app-delivered therapy are limited.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>We conducted this systematic review with youth co-researchers to ensure that this review addressed the questions that were most important to them. The objective of this review is to synthesize the best available evidence on the effectiveness of mobile apps for the reduction of depressive symptoms (depression, generalized anxiety, psychological distress) and alcohol use among youth.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Search Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We conducted electronic searches of the following bibliographic databases for studies published between January 1, 2008, and July 1, 2022: MEDLINE (via Ovid), Embase (via Ovid), PsycINFO (via Ovid), CINAHL (via EBSCOHost), and CENTRAL (via the Cochrane Library). The search used a combination of indexed terms, free text words, and MeSH headings. We manually screened the references of relevant systematic reviews and included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for additional eligible studies, and contacted authors for full reports of identified trial registries or protocols.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Selection Criteria</h3>\n \n <p>We included RCTs conducted among youth aged 15–24 years from any setting. We did not exclude populations on the basis of gender, socioeconomic status, geographic location or other personal characteristics. We included studies which assessed the effectiveness of app-delivered mental health support or therapy interventions that targeted the management of depressive disorders and/or alcohol use disorders. We excluded apps that targeted general wellness, apps which focused on prevention of psychological disorders and apps that targeted bipolar disorder, psychosis, post-traumatic stress disorder, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, substance use disorders (aside from alcohol), and sleep disorders. Eligible comparisons included usual care, no intervention, wait-list control, alternative or controlled mobile applications. We included studies which reported outcomes on depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, alcohol use and psychological distress over any follow-up period.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Data Collection and Analysis</h3>\n \n <p>We standardized the PICO definitions (population, intervention, comparison, and outcome) of each included study and grouped studies by the type of therapy or support offered by the app. Whenever app design and clinical homogeneity allowed, we meta-analyzed outcomes using a random-effects model. Outcome data measured using categorical scales were synthesized using odds ratios. Outcome data measured using continuous scales were synthesized as the standardized mean difference. We assessed the methodological quality of each included study using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool and we assessed certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Main Results</h3>\n \n <p>From 5280 unique citations, we included 36 RCTs published in 37 reports and conducted in 15 different countries (7984 participants). Among the 36 included trials, we assessed two with an overall low risk of bias, 8 trials with some concern regarding risk of bias, and 26 trials with a high risk of bias. Interventions varied in the type of therapy or supports offered. The most common intervention designs employed mindfulness training, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), or a combination of the two (mindfulness + CBT). However, other interventions also included self-monitoring, medication reminders, cognitive bias modification or positive stimulation, dialectical behavioral therapy, gamified health promotion, or social skill building. Mindfulness apps led to short term improvements in depressive symptoms when compared to a withheld control (SMD = −0.36; 95% CI [−0.63, −0.10]; <i>p</i> = 0.007, <i>n</i> = 3 RCTs, GRADE: very low certainty) and when compared to an active control (SMD = −0.27; 95% CI [−0.53, −0.01]; <i>p</i> = 0.04, <i>n</i> = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low). Apps delivering this type of support also significantly improved symptoms of anxiety when compared to a withheld control (SMD = −0.35; 95% CI [−0.60, −0.09]; <i>p</i> = 0.008, <i>n</i> = 3 RCTs, GRADE: very low) but not when compared to an active control (SMD = −0.24; 95% CI [−0.50, 0.02]; <i>p</i> = 0.07, <i>n</i> = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low). Mindfulness apps showed improvements in psychological stress that approached statistical significance among participants receiving the mindfulness mobile apps compared to those in the withheld control (SMD = −0.27; 95% CI [−0.56, 0.03]; <i>p</i> = .07, <i>n</i> = 4 RCTs, GRADE: very low). CBT apps also led to short-term improvements in depressive symptoms when compared to a withheld control (SMD = −0.40; 95% CI [−0.80, 0.01]; <i>p</i> = 0.05, <i>n</i> = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low) and when compared to an active control (SMD = −0.59; 95% CI [−0.98, −0.19]; <i>p</i> = 0.003, <i>n</i> = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low). CBT-based apps also improved symptoms of anxiety compared to a withheld control (SMD = −0.51; 95% CI [−0.94, −0.09]; <i>p</i> = 0.02, <i>n</i> = 3 RCTs, GRADE: very low) but not when compared to an active control (SMD = −0.26; 95% CI [−1.11, 0.59]; <i>p</i> = 0.55, <i>n</i> = 3 RCTs, GRADE: very low). Apps which combined mindfulness and CBT did not significantly improve symptoms of depression (SMD = −0.20; 95% CI [−0.42, 0.02]; <i>p</i> = 0.07, <i>n</i> = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low) or anxiety (SMD = −0.21; 95% CI [−0.49, 0.07]; <i>p</i> = 0.14, <i>n</i> = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low). However, these apps did improve psychological distress (SMD = −0.43; 95% CI [−0.74, −0.12]; <i>p</i> = 0.006, <i>n</i> = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low). The results of trials on apps to reduce alcohol use were inconsistent. We did not identify any harms associated with the use of apps to manage mental health concerns. All effectiveness results had a very low certainty of evidence rating using the GRADE approach, meaning that apps which deliver therapy or other mental health support may reduce symptoms of depression, anxiety and psychological distress but the evidence is very uncertain.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Authors' Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>We reviewed evidence from 36 trials conducted among youth. According to our meta-analyses, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of apps on depression, anxiety, psychological distress, and alcohol use. Very few effects were interpreted to be of clinical importance. Most of the RCTs were small studies focusing on efficacy for youth at risk for depressive symptoms. Larger trials are needed to evaluate effectiveness and allow for further analysis of subgroup differences. Longer trials are also needed to better estimate the clinical importance of these apps over the long term.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1398","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mobile apps to reduce depressive symptoms and alcohol use in youth: A systematic review and meta-analysis: A systematic review\",\"authors\":\"Olivia Magwood,&nbsp;Ammar Saad,&nbsp;Dominique Ranger,&nbsp;Kate Volpini,&nbsp;Franklin Rukikamirera,&nbsp;Rinila Haridas,&nbsp;Shahab Sayfi,&nbsp;Jeremie Alexander,&nbsp;Yvonne Tan,&nbsp;Kevin Pottie\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/cl2.1398\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Among youth, symptoms of depression, anxiety, and alcohol use are associated with considerable illness and disability. Youth face many personal and health system barriers in accessing mental health care. Mobile applications (apps) offer youth potentially accessible, scalable, and anonymous therapy and other support. Recent systematic reviews on apps to reduce mental health symptoms among youth have reported uncertain effectiveness, but analyses based on the type of app-delivered therapy are limited.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>We conducted this systematic review with youth co-researchers to ensure that this review addressed the questions that were most important to them. The objective of this review is to synthesize the best available evidence on the effectiveness of mobile apps for the reduction of depressive symptoms (depression, generalized anxiety, psychological distress) and alcohol use among youth.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Search Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We conducted electronic searches of the following bibliographic databases for studies published between January 1, 2008, and July 1, 2022: MEDLINE (via Ovid), Embase (via Ovid), PsycINFO (via Ovid), CINAHL (via EBSCOHost), and CENTRAL (via the Cochrane Library). The search used a combination of indexed terms, free text words, and MeSH headings. We manually screened the references of relevant systematic reviews and included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for additional eligible studies, and contacted authors for full reports of identified trial registries or protocols.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Selection Criteria</h3>\\n \\n <p>We included RCTs conducted among youth aged 15–24 years from any setting. We did not exclude populations on the basis of gender, socioeconomic status, geographic location or other personal characteristics. We included studies which assessed the effectiveness of app-delivered mental health support or therapy interventions that targeted the management of depressive disorders and/or alcohol use disorders. We excluded apps that targeted general wellness, apps which focused on prevention of psychological disorders and apps that targeted bipolar disorder, psychosis, post-traumatic stress disorder, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, substance use disorders (aside from alcohol), and sleep disorders. Eligible comparisons included usual care, no intervention, wait-list control, alternative or controlled mobile applications. We included studies which reported outcomes on depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, alcohol use and psychological distress over any follow-up period.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Data Collection and Analysis</h3>\\n \\n <p>We standardized the PICO definitions (population, intervention, comparison, and outcome) of each included study and grouped studies by the type of therapy or support offered by the app. Whenever app design and clinical homogeneity allowed, we meta-analyzed outcomes using a random-effects model. Outcome data measured using categorical scales were synthesized using odds ratios. Outcome data measured using continuous scales were synthesized as the standardized mean difference. We assessed the methodological quality of each included study using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool and we assessed certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Main Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>From 5280 unique citations, we included 36 RCTs published in 37 reports and conducted in 15 different countries (7984 participants). Among the 36 included trials, we assessed two with an overall low risk of bias, 8 trials with some concern regarding risk of bias, and 26 trials with a high risk of bias. Interventions varied in the type of therapy or supports offered. The most common intervention designs employed mindfulness training, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), or a combination of the two (mindfulness + CBT). However, other interventions also included self-monitoring, medication reminders, cognitive bias modification or positive stimulation, dialectical behavioral therapy, gamified health promotion, or social skill building. Mindfulness apps led to short term improvements in depressive symptoms when compared to a withheld control (SMD = −0.36; 95% CI [−0.63, −0.10]; <i>p</i> = 0.007, <i>n</i> = 3 RCTs, GRADE: very low certainty) and when compared to an active control (SMD = −0.27; 95% CI [−0.53, −0.01]; <i>p</i> = 0.04, <i>n</i> = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low). Apps delivering this type of support also significantly improved symptoms of anxiety when compared to a withheld control (SMD = −0.35; 95% CI [−0.60, −0.09]; <i>p</i> = 0.008, <i>n</i> = 3 RCTs, GRADE: very low) but not when compared to an active control (SMD = −0.24; 95% CI [−0.50, 0.02]; <i>p</i> = 0.07, <i>n</i> = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low). Mindfulness apps showed improvements in psychological stress that approached statistical significance among participants receiving the mindfulness mobile apps compared to those in the withheld control (SMD = −0.27; 95% CI [−0.56, 0.03]; <i>p</i> = .07, <i>n</i> = 4 RCTs, GRADE: very low). CBT apps also led to short-term improvements in depressive symptoms when compared to a withheld control (SMD = −0.40; 95% CI [−0.80, 0.01]; <i>p</i> = 0.05, <i>n</i> = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low) and when compared to an active control (SMD = −0.59; 95% CI [−0.98, −0.19]; <i>p</i> = 0.003, <i>n</i> = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low). CBT-based apps also improved symptoms of anxiety compared to a withheld control (SMD = −0.51; 95% CI [−0.94, −0.09]; <i>p</i> = 0.02, <i>n</i> = 3 RCTs, GRADE: very low) but not when compared to an active control (SMD = −0.26; 95% CI [−1.11, 0.59]; <i>p</i> = 0.55, <i>n</i> = 3 RCTs, GRADE: very low). Apps which combined mindfulness and CBT did not significantly improve symptoms of depression (SMD = −0.20; 95% CI [−0.42, 0.02]; <i>p</i> = 0.07, <i>n</i> = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low) or anxiety (SMD = −0.21; 95% CI [−0.49, 0.07]; <i>p</i> = 0.14, <i>n</i> = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low). However, these apps did improve psychological distress (SMD = −0.43; 95% CI [−0.74, −0.12]; <i>p</i> = 0.006, <i>n</i> = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low). The results of trials on apps to reduce alcohol use were inconsistent. We did not identify any harms associated with the use of apps to manage mental health concerns. All effectiveness results had a very low certainty of evidence rating using the GRADE approach, meaning that apps which deliver therapy or other mental health support may reduce symptoms of depression, anxiety and psychological distress but the evidence is very uncertain.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Authors' Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>We reviewed evidence from 36 trials conducted among youth. According to our meta-analyses, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of apps on depression, anxiety, psychological distress, and alcohol use. Very few effects were interpreted to be of clinical importance. Most of the RCTs were small studies focusing on efficacy for youth at risk for depressive symptoms. Larger trials are needed to evaluate effectiveness and allow for further analysis of subgroup differences. Longer trials are also needed to better estimate the clinical importance of these apps over the long term.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36698,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Campbell Systematic Reviews\",\"volume\":\"20 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1398\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Campbell Systematic Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cl2.1398\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cl2.1398","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景 在青少年中,抑郁、焦虑和酗酒等症状与严重的疾病和残疾有关。青少年在获得心理健康护理方面面临着许多个人和医疗系统方面的障碍。移动应用程序(Apps)可为青少年提供潜在的、可扩展的、匿名的治疗和其他支持。最近,有关减少青少年心理健康症状的应用程序的系统性综述报告称,其有效性并不确定,但基于应用程序提供的治疗类型的分析却很有限。 目标 我们与青少年共同开展了这项系统性综述,以确保这项综述能够解决对青少年来说最重要的问题。本综述旨在综合现有的最佳证据,说明手机应用在减少青少年抑郁症状(抑郁、广泛焦虑、心理困扰)和饮酒方面的有效性。 检索方法 我们在以下文献数据库中对 2008 年 1 月 1 日至 2022 年 7 月 1 日期间发表的研究进行了电子检索:MEDLINE(通过 Ovid)、Embase(通过 Ovid)、PsycINFO(通过 Ovid)、CINAHL(通过 EBSCOHost)和 CENTRAL(通过 Cochrane 图书馆)。检索结合使用了索引术语、自由文本词和 MeSH 标题。我们人工筛选了相关系统综述的参考文献,并纳入了随机对照试验 (RCT) 以寻找更多符合条件的研究,我们还联系了作者以获取已确定的试验登记册或协议的完整报告。 筛选标准 我们纳入了在任何环境下对 15-24 岁青少年进行的随机对照试验。我们没有因性别、社会经济地位、地理位置或其他个人特征而排除人群。我们纳入的研究评估了针对抑郁障碍和/或酒精使用障碍管理的应用程序提供的心理健康支持或治疗干预的有效性。我们排除了针对一般健康的应用程序、侧重于预防心理障碍的应用程序以及针对双相情感障碍、精神病、创伤后应激障碍、注意力缺陷多动障碍、药物使用障碍(酒精除外)和睡眠障碍的应用程序。符合条件的比较研究包括常规护理、无干预、等待名单对照、替代或受控移动应用。我们纳入了报告任何随访期间抑郁症状、焦虑症状、酒精使用和心理困扰结果的研究。 数据收集与分析 我们对每项纳入研究的 PICO 定义(人群、干预、比较和结果)进行了标准化,并根据应用程序提供的治疗或支持类型对研究进行了分组。在应用程序设计和临床同质性允许的情况下,我们使用随机效应模型对结果进行了元分析。使用分类量表测量的结果数据使用几率比进行综合。使用连续量表测量的结果数据以标准化平均差进行综合。我们使用 Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 工具评估了每项纳入研究的方法学质量,并使用 GRADE 方法评估了证据的确定性。 主要结果 从 5280 条引用文献中,我们纳入了在 15 个不同国家(7984 名参与者)进行的 36 项 RCT,共发表在 37 份报告中。在纳入的 36 项试验中,我们评估了 2 项总体偏倚风险较低的试验、8 项存在一定偏倚风险的试验以及 26 项偏倚风险较高的试验。干预措施提供的治疗或支持类型各不相同。最常见的干预设计包括正念训练、认知行为疗法(CBT)或两者的结合(正念+CBT)。不过,其他干预措施还包括自我监控、用药提醒、认知偏差修正或积极刺激、辩证行为疗法、游戏化健康促进或社交技能培养。与保留对照组相比(SMD = -0.36;95% CI [-0.63,-0.10];p = 0.007,n = 3 项 RCT,GRADE:确定性极低),与积极对照组相比(SMD = -0.27;95% CI [-0.53,-0.01];p = 0.04,n = 2 项 RCT,GRADE:确定性极低),正念应用程序可在短期内改善抑郁症状。与不提供支持的对照组相比,提供此类支持的应用程序也能显著改善焦虑症状(SMD = -0.35;95% CI [-0.60,-0.09];P = 0.05)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Mobile apps to reduce depressive symptoms and alcohol use in youth: A systematic review and meta-analysis: A systematic review

Background

Among youth, symptoms of depression, anxiety, and alcohol use are associated with considerable illness and disability. Youth face many personal and health system barriers in accessing mental health care. Mobile applications (apps) offer youth potentially accessible, scalable, and anonymous therapy and other support. Recent systematic reviews on apps to reduce mental health symptoms among youth have reported uncertain effectiveness, but analyses based on the type of app-delivered therapy are limited.

Objectives

We conducted this systematic review with youth co-researchers to ensure that this review addressed the questions that were most important to them. The objective of this review is to synthesize the best available evidence on the effectiveness of mobile apps for the reduction of depressive symptoms (depression, generalized anxiety, psychological distress) and alcohol use among youth.

Search Methods

We conducted electronic searches of the following bibliographic databases for studies published between January 1, 2008, and July 1, 2022: MEDLINE (via Ovid), Embase (via Ovid), PsycINFO (via Ovid), CINAHL (via EBSCOHost), and CENTRAL (via the Cochrane Library). The search used a combination of indexed terms, free text words, and MeSH headings. We manually screened the references of relevant systematic reviews and included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for additional eligible studies, and contacted authors for full reports of identified trial registries or protocols.

Selection Criteria

We included RCTs conducted among youth aged 15–24 years from any setting. We did not exclude populations on the basis of gender, socioeconomic status, geographic location or other personal characteristics. We included studies which assessed the effectiveness of app-delivered mental health support or therapy interventions that targeted the management of depressive disorders and/or alcohol use disorders. We excluded apps that targeted general wellness, apps which focused on prevention of psychological disorders and apps that targeted bipolar disorder, psychosis, post-traumatic stress disorder, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, substance use disorders (aside from alcohol), and sleep disorders. Eligible comparisons included usual care, no intervention, wait-list control, alternative or controlled mobile applications. We included studies which reported outcomes on depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, alcohol use and psychological distress over any follow-up period.

Data Collection and Analysis

We standardized the PICO definitions (population, intervention, comparison, and outcome) of each included study and grouped studies by the type of therapy or support offered by the app. Whenever app design and clinical homogeneity allowed, we meta-analyzed outcomes using a random-effects model. Outcome data measured using categorical scales were synthesized using odds ratios. Outcome data measured using continuous scales were synthesized as the standardized mean difference. We assessed the methodological quality of each included study using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool and we assessed certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

Main Results

From 5280 unique citations, we included 36 RCTs published in 37 reports and conducted in 15 different countries (7984 participants). Among the 36 included trials, we assessed two with an overall low risk of bias, 8 trials with some concern regarding risk of bias, and 26 trials with a high risk of bias. Interventions varied in the type of therapy or supports offered. The most common intervention designs employed mindfulness training, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), or a combination of the two (mindfulness + CBT). However, other interventions also included self-monitoring, medication reminders, cognitive bias modification or positive stimulation, dialectical behavioral therapy, gamified health promotion, or social skill building. Mindfulness apps led to short term improvements in depressive symptoms when compared to a withheld control (SMD = −0.36; 95% CI [−0.63, −0.10]; p = 0.007, n = 3 RCTs, GRADE: very low certainty) and when compared to an active control (SMD = −0.27; 95% CI [−0.53, −0.01]; p = 0.04, n = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low). Apps delivering this type of support also significantly improved symptoms of anxiety when compared to a withheld control (SMD = −0.35; 95% CI [−0.60, −0.09]; p = 0.008, n = 3 RCTs, GRADE: very low) but not when compared to an active control (SMD = −0.24; 95% CI [−0.50, 0.02]; p = 0.07, n = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low). Mindfulness apps showed improvements in psychological stress that approached statistical significance among participants receiving the mindfulness mobile apps compared to those in the withheld control (SMD = −0.27; 95% CI [−0.56, 0.03]; p = .07, n = 4 RCTs, GRADE: very low). CBT apps also led to short-term improvements in depressive symptoms when compared to a withheld control (SMD = −0.40; 95% CI [−0.80, 0.01]; p = 0.05, n = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low) and when compared to an active control (SMD = −0.59; 95% CI [−0.98, −0.19]; p = 0.003, n = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low). CBT-based apps also improved symptoms of anxiety compared to a withheld control (SMD = −0.51; 95% CI [−0.94, −0.09]; p = 0.02, n = 3 RCTs, GRADE: very low) but not when compared to an active control (SMD = −0.26; 95% CI [−1.11, 0.59]; p = 0.55, n = 3 RCTs, GRADE: very low). Apps which combined mindfulness and CBT did not significantly improve symptoms of depression (SMD = −0.20; 95% CI [−0.42, 0.02]; p = 0.07, n = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low) or anxiety (SMD = −0.21; 95% CI [−0.49, 0.07]; p = 0.14, n = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low). However, these apps did improve psychological distress (SMD = −0.43; 95% CI [−0.74, −0.12]; p = 0.006, n = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low). The results of trials on apps to reduce alcohol use were inconsistent. We did not identify any harms associated with the use of apps to manage mental health concerns. All effectiveness results had a very low certainty of evidence rating using the GRADE approach, meaning that apps which deliver therapy or other mental health support may reduce symptoms of depression, anxiety and psychological distress but the evidence is very uncertain.

Authors' Conclusions

We reviewed evidence from 36 trials conducted among youth. According to our meta-analyses, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of apps on depression, anxiety, psychological distress, and alcohol use. Very few effects were interpreted to be of clinical importance. Most of the RCTs were small studies focusing on efficacy for youth at risk for depressive symptoms. Larger trials are needed to evaluate effectiveness and allow for further analysis of subgroup differences. Longer trials are also needed to better estimate the clinical importance of these apps over the long term.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Campbell Systematic Reviews
Campbell Systematic Reviews Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
21.90%
发文量
80
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
Critical appraisal of methodological quality and completeness of reporting in Chinese social science systematic reviews with meta-analysis: A systematic review. The effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for reducing problematic substance use, mental ill health, and housing instability in people experiencing homelessness in high income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Exposure to hate in online and traditional media: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of this exposure on individuals and communities. PROTOCOL: Non-criminal justice interventions for countering cognitive and behavioural radicalisation amongst children and adolescents: A systematic review of effectiveness and implementation. Protocol: The impact of integrated thematic instruction model on primary and secondary school students compared to standard teaching: A protocol of systematic review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1