Mobile-based interventions for common mental disorders in youth: a systematic evaluation of pediatric health apps.
Adolescent
Anxiety
Children
Depression
Internet
Posttraumatic stress disorder
Psychotherapy
Smartphone
mHealth
Journal
Child and adolescent psychiatry and mental health
ISSN: 1753-2000
Titre abrégé: Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101297974
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
13 Sep 2021
13 Sep 2021
Historique:
received:
01
07
2020
accepted:
27
08
2021
entrez:
14
9
2021
pubmed:
15
9
2021
medline:
15
9
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The access to empirically-supported treatments for common mental disorders in children and adolescents is often limited. Mental health apps might extend service supplies, as they are deemed to be cost-efficient, scalable and appealing for youth. However, little is known about the quality of available apps. Therefore, we aimed to systematically evaluate current mobile-based interventions for pediatric anxiety, depression and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Systematic searches were conducted in Google Play Store and Apple App Store to identify relevant apps. To be eligible for inclusion, apps needed to be: (1) designed to target either anxiety, depression or PTSD in youth (0-18 years); (2) developed for children, adolescents or caregivers; (3) provided in English or German; (4) operative after download. The quality of eligible apps was assessed with two standardized rating systems (i.e., Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) and ENLIGHT) independently by two reviewers. Overall, the searches revealed 3806 apps, with 15 mental health apps (0.39%) fulfilling our inclusion criteria. The mean overall scores suggested a moderate app quality (MARS: M = 3.59, SD = 0.50; ENLIGHT: M = 3.22, SD = 0.73). Moreover, only one app was evaluated in an RCT. The correlation of both rating scales was high (r = .936; p < .001), whereas no significant correlations were found between rating scales and user ratings (p > .05). Our results point to a rather poor overall app quality, and indicate an absence of scientific-driven development and lack of methodologically sound evaluation of apps. Thus, future high-quality research is required, both in terms of theoretically informed intervention development and assessment of mental health apps in RCTs. Furthermore, institutionalized best-practices that provide central information on different aspects of apps (e.g., effectiveness, safety, and data security) for patients, caregivers, stakeholders and mental health professionals are urgently needed.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The access to empirically-supported treatments for common mental disorders in children and adolescents is often limited. Mental health apps might extend service supplies, as they are deemed to be cost-efficient, scalable and appealing for youth. However, little is known about the quality of available apps. Therefore, we aimed to systematically evaluate current mobile-based interventions for pediatric anxiety, depression and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
METHODS
METHODS
Systematic searches were conducted in Google Play Store and Apple App Store to identify relevant apps. To be eligible for inclusion, apps needed to be: (1) designed to target either anxiety, depression or PTSD in youth (0-18 years); (2) developed for children, adolescents or caregivers; (3) provided in English or German; (4) operative after download. The quality of eligible apps was assessed with two standardized rating systems (i.e., Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) and ENLIGHT) independently by two reviewers.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Overall, the searches revealed 3806 apps, with 15 mental health apps (0.39%) fulfilling our inclusion criteria. The mean overall scores suggested a moderate app quality (MARS: M = 3.59, SD = 0.50; ENLIGHT: M = 3.22, SD = 0.73). Moreover, only one app was evaluated in an RCT. The correlation of both rating scales was high (r = .936; p < .001), whereas no significant correlations were found between rating scales and user ratings (p > .05).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Our results point to a rather poor overall app quality, and indicate an absence of scientific-driven development and lack of methodologically sound evaluation of apps. Thus, future high-quality research is required, both in terms of theoretically informed intervention development and assessment of mental health apps in RCTs. Furthermore, institutionalized best-practices that provide central information on different aspects of apps (e.g., effectiveness, safety, and data security) for patients, caregivers, stakeholders and mental health professionals are urgently needed.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34517896
doi: 10.1186/s13034-021-00401-6
pii: 10.1186/s13034-021-00401-6
pmc: PMC8438844
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
49Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019 Aug 05;7(8):e14991
pubmed: 31381501
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2021 Jun 9;9(6):e22587
pubmed: 34106073
World Psychiatry. 2015 Jun;14(2):207-22
pubmed: 26043339
JAMA Psychiatry. 2020 Jul 1;77(7):694-702
pubmed: 32186668
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2017 Jan;56(1):10-19.e2
pubmed: 27993223
J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol. 2016 Apr;26(3):235-45
pubmed: 26465266
JAMA Netw Open. 2019 Apr 5;2(4):e192542
pubmed: 31002321
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Jul 18;14:313
pubmed: 25037951
PLoS One. 2020 Nov 2;15(11):e0241480
pubmed: 33137123
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2015 Mar 11;3(1):e27
pubmed: 25760773
Z Kinder Jugendpsychiatr Psychother. 2020 Jan;48(1):33-46
pubmed: 30422059
J Anxiety Disord. 2015 Jan;29:83-92
pubmed: 25527900
Trials. 2020 Mar 12;21(1):253
pubmed: 32164723
Front Psychiatry. 2020 Feb 11;10:993
pubmed: 32116819
NPJ Digit Med. 2019 Dec 2;2:118
pubmed: 31815193
Depress Anxiety. 2019 Mar;36(3):213-224
pubmed: 30450811
BMJ. 2019 Mar 20;364:l920
pubmed: 30894349
Lancet Digit Health. 2019 Jun;1(2):e52-e54
pubmed: 33323229
World J Biol Psychiatry. 2018;19(sup1):S21-S35
pubmed: 30204563
J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2006 Dec;47(12):1263-71
pubmed: 17176381
Health Aff (Millwood). 2016 Dec 1;35(12):2310-2318
pubmed: 27920321
Lancet. 2016 Oct 8;388(10053):1545-1602
pubmed: 27733282
Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2018 Nov;2(11):792-801
pubmed: 30241993
Syst Rev. 2019 Nov 7;8(1):265
pubmed: 31699139
Front Psychiatry. 2019 Nov 13;10:759
pubmed: 31798468
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2015 Feb 16;3(1):e16
pubmed: 25689790
Eur J Psychotraumatol. 2020 Jan 9;11(1):1701788
pubmed: 32002136
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2018 Oct 25;6(10):e10718
pubmed: 30361196
J Chiropr Med. 2016 Jun;15(2):155-63
pubmed: 27330520
Psychol Med. 2014 Apr;44(6):1303-17
pubmed: 23931656
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2016 Mar 10;13:35
pubmed: 26964880
JMIR Aging. 2021 Feb 19;4(1):e23313
pubmed: 33605884
J Med Internet Res. 2017 Mar 21;19(3):e82
pubmed: 28325712
J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2015 Mar;56(3):345-65
pubmed: 25649325
Lancet. 2016 Aug 27;388(10047):881-90
pubmed: 27289172
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2016 Aug 09;4(3):e96
pubmed: 27507641
J Med Internet Res. 2014 Sep 02;16(9):e199
pubmed: 25270886
JAMA Psychiatry. 2013 Jul;70(7):750-61
pubmed: 23754332
World Psychiatry. 2019 Oct;18(3):325-336
pubmed: 31496095
Int J Behav Med. 2021 Oct;28(5):552-560
pubmed: 33215348
Curr Opin Psychiatry. 2007 Jul;20(4):359-64
pubmed: 17551351
Behav Res Ther. 2015 Apr;67:1-18
pubmed: 25727678
BMJ Open. 2017 Jan 27;7(1):e013518
pubmed: 28132007
BMC Psychiatry. 2010 Dec 30;10:113
pubmed: 21192795
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2010 Oct;49(10):980-9
pubmed: 20855043
Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2016 Dec;30(6):1098-1109
pubmed: 29103552
Depress Anxiety. 2017 Jun;34(6):518-525
pubmed: 28504859
Front Psychol. 2021 Mar 19;12:544129
pubmed: 33815184
Psychother Psychosom. 2016;85(3):159-70
pubmed: 27043952
Clin Psychol Rev. 2021 Feb;83:101953
pubmed: 33422841
JAMA Psychiatry. 2019 Jan 1;76(1):41-50
pubmed: 30383099
Fortschr Neurol Psychiatr. 2013 Nov;81(11):614-27
pubmed: 24194055
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2020 Mar 27;8(3):e14479
pubmed: 32217504
World Psychiatry. 2019 Feb;18(1):97-98
pubmed: 30600619
PLoS One. 2015 Mar 18;10(3):e0119895
pubmed: 25786025
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2017 Jun 24;14(1):83
pubmed: 28646889