Jake Linardon, Matthew Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, Joseph Firth, Simon B. Goldberg, Cleo Anderson, Zoe McClure, John Torous
{"title":"Systematic review and meta-analysis of adverse events in clinical trials of mental health apps","authors":"Jake Linardon, Matthew Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, Joseph Firth, Simon B. Goldberg, Cleo Anderson, Zoe McClure, John Torous","doi":"10.1038/s41746-024-01388-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Mental health apps are efficacious, yet they may pose risks in some. This review (CRD42024506486) examined adverse events (AEs) from mental health apps. We searched (May 2024) the Medline, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and ProQuest databases to identify clinical trials of mental health apps. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Only 55 of 171 identified clinical trials reported AEs. AEs were more likely to be reported in trials sampling schizophrenia and delivering apps with symptom monitoring technology. The meta-analytic deterioration rate from 13 app conditions was 6.7% (95% CI = 4.3, 10.1, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 75%). Deterioration rates did not differ between app and control groups (OR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.62–1.01, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%). Reporting of AEs was heterogeneous, in terms of assessments used, events recorded, and detail provided. Overall, few clinical trials of mental health apps report AEs. Those that do often provide insufficient information to properly judge risks related to app use.</p>","PeriodicalId":19349,"journal":{"name":"NPJ Digital Medicine","volume":"85 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":12.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NPJ Digital Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-024-01388-y","RegionNum":1,"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
Mental health apps are efficacious, yet they may pose risks in some. This review (CRD42024506486) examined adverse events (AEs) from mental health apps. We searched (May 2024) the Medline, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and ProQuest databases to identify clinical trials of mental health apps. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Only 55 of 171 identified clinical trials reported AEs. AEs were more likely to be reported in trials sampling schizophrenia and delivering apps with symptom monitoring technology. The meta-analytic deterioration rate from 13 app conditions was 6.7% (95% CI = 4.3, 10.1, I2 = 75%). Deterioration rates did not differ between app and control groups (OR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.62–1.01, I2 = 0%). Reporting of AEs was heterogeneous, in terms of assessments used, events recorded, and detail provided. Overall, few clinical trials of mental health apps report AEs. Those that do often provide insufficient information to properly judge risks related to app use.
期刊介绍：
npj Digital Medicine is an online open-access journal that focuses on publishing peer-reviewed research in the field of digital medicine. The journal covers various aspects of digital medicine, including the application and implementation of digital and mobile technologies in clinical settings, virtual healthcare, and the use of artificial intelligence and informatics.
The primary goal of the journal is to support innovation and the advancement of healthcare through the integration of new digital and mobile technologies. When determining if a manuscript is suitable for publication, the journal considers four important criteria: novelty, clinical relevance, scientific rigor, and digital innovation.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
