Reviewhybrid2024

Digital mental health interventions for the treatment of depression: A multiverse meta-analysis

Constantin Yves Plessen · Olga Maria Panagiotopoulou · Lingyao Tong · Pim J. Cuijpers · Eirini Karyotaki

52 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Affective Disorders

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Digital Mental Health Interventions Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes Mental Health Treatment and Access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The varying sizes of effects in published meta-analyses on digital interventions for depression prompt questions about their efficacy. METHODS: A systematic search in Embase, PsycINFO, and PubMed identified 125 randomised controlled trials up to February 2023, comparing digital interventions for depression against inactive controls. The stability of results was evaluated with a multiverse meta-analysis, thousands of meta-analyses were conducted based on different combinations of analytical choices, like target populations, intervention characteristics, and study designs. RESULTS: A total of 3638 meta-analyses were performed based on 125 randomised controlled trials and 263 effect sizes, with a total of 32,733 participants. The average effect size was Hedges' g = 0.43, remaining positive at both the 10th (g = 0.16) and 90th percentiles (g = 0.74). Most meta-analyses indicated a statistically significant benefit of digital interventions. Larger effects were observed in meta-analyses focusing on adults, low- and middle-income countries, guided interventions, comparing interventions with waitlist controls, and patients with major depressive or unipolar mood disorders. Smaller effects appeared when adjusting for publication bias and in assessments after 24 weeks. LIMITATIONS: While multiverse meta-analysis aims to exhaustively investigate various analytical decisions, some subjectivity remains due to the necessity of making choices that affect the methodology. Additionally, the quality of the included primary studies was low. CONCLUSIONS: The analytical decisions made during performing pairwise meta-analyses result in vibrations from small to medium effect sizes. Our study provides robust evidence for the effectiveness of digital interventions for depression while highlighting important factors associated with treatment outcomes.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 52 citations exist upstream.

References

2019RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials 2010Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package 2011False-Positive Psychology 2021Global prevalence and burden of depressive and anxiety disorders in 204 countries and territories in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic 2017Internet-based vs. face-to-face cognitive behavior therapy for psychiatric and somatic disorders: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis 2017The efficacy of smartphone‐based mental health interventions for depressive symptoms: a meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials 2013Meta-regression approximations to reduce publication selection bias 2021Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Depression

Cited by

2025Influence of Topic Familiarity and Prompt Specificity on Citation Fabrication in Mental Health Research Using Large Language Models: Experimental Study 2025Transdiagnostic-focused apps for depression and anxiety: a meta-analysis 2025Anxiety and depression in emerging adults: The STAND program as a model of scalable screening and intervention 2025Effectiveness of mHealth interventions targeting physical activity, sedentary behaviour, sleep or nutrition on emotional, behavioural and eating disorders in adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.