移动干预对压力管理的有效性和潜力的系统回顾和贝叶斯网络荟萃分析

IF 21.4 1区 心理学 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
Huanya Zhu, Qiang Chen, Shijuan Wei, Xuebing Wu, Qianqian Ju, Jinmeng Liu, Yiqun Gan
{"title":"移动干预对压力管理的有效性和潜力的系统回顾和贝叶斯网络荟萃分析","authors":"Huanya Zhu, Qiang Chen, Shijuan Wei, Xuebing Wu, Qianqian Ju, Jinmeng Liu, Yiqun Gan","doi":"10.1038/s41562-025-02162-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The increasing prevalence of stress underscores the demand for effective, self-administered mobile mental health interventions, yet their efficacy and accessibility are still unclear. Here, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to classify self-administered mobile stress management interventions, compare their efficacy and examine their moderators. We searched PsycINFO, PubMed, Web of Science, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus and PsycARTICLES from database inception to 20 November 2023. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials on peer-reviewed, Internet-based, self-administered psychological interventions for stress reduction in healthy or subhealthy adults. A total of 63 studies with 20,454 participants were included (68.18% female; mean age 39.14 years). Integrated expert insights with large language models to develop a three-dimensional framework encompassing theoretical foundation, human support and mobile technology. Intervention labels were independently coded by the authors and ChatGPT. The included studies’ quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. Bayesian network meta-analysis and Bayesian meta-regression were used to explore comparative efficacy and potential moderators. The framework classified and compared 19 mobile stress interventions, identifying key moderating factors for optimization. Stress management programmes, problem-solving therapy and mindfulness meditation ranked the top. There was no conclusive evidence that human support or mobile technology significantly enhanced intervention outcomes. The evidence is subject to sex imbalance and quality risk, while the limited statistical power of meta-regression warrants caution in interpreting moderator effects. Our findings provide insights for designing more effective and scalable stress interventions and offer promising strategies to reduce health service disparities and advance the Sustainable Development Goals.</p>","PeriodicalId":19074,"journal":{"name":"Nature Human Behaviour","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":21.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis on the efficacy and potential of mobile interventions for stress management\",\"authors\":\"Huanya Zhu, Qiang Chen, Shijuan Wei, Xuebing Wu, Qianqian Ju, Jinmeng Liu, Yiqun Gan\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41562-025-02162-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The increasing prevalence of stress underscores the demand for effective, self-administered mobile mental health interventions, yet their efficacy and accessibility are still unclear. Here, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to classify self-administered mobile stress management interventions, compare their efficacy and examine their moderators. We searched PsycINFO, PubMed, Web of Science, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus and PsycARTICLES from database inception to 20 November 2023. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials on peer-reviewed, Internet-based, self-administered psychological interventions for stress reduction in healthy or subhealthy adults. A total of 63 studies with 20,454 participants were included (68.18% female; mean age 39.14 years). Integrated expert insights with large language models to develop a three-dimensional framework encompassing theoretical foundation, human support and mobile technology. Intervention labels were independently coded by the authors and ChatGPT. The included studies’ quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. Bayesian network meta-analysis and Bayesian meta-regression were used to explore comparative efficacy and potential moderators. The framework classified and compared 19 mobile stress interventions, identifying key moderating factors for optimization. Stress management programmes, problem-solving therapy and mindfulness meditation ranked the top. There was no conclusive evidence that human support or mobile technology significantly enhanced intervention outcomes. The evidence is subject to sex imbalance and quality risk, while the limited statistical power of meta-regression warrants caution in interpreting moderator effects. Our findings provide insights for designing more effective and scalable stress interventions and offer promising strategies to reduce health service disparities and advance the Sustainable Development Goals.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19074,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nature Human Behaviour\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":21.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nature Human Behaviour\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-025-02162-0\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nature Human Behaviour","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-025-02162-0","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

日益普遍的压力强调了对有效的、自我管理的流动精神卫生干预措施的需求,但其有效性和可及性仍不清楚。在此,本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在对自我管理的移动压力管理干预进行分类,比较其效果并检查其调节因子。从数据库建立到2023年11月20日,我们检索了PsycINFO、PubMed、Web of Science、MEDLINE、Embase、CINAHL、Scopus和PsycARTICLES。符合条件的研究是随机对照试验,在同行评审、基于互联网、自我管理的心理干预措施中减少健康或亚健康成年人的压力。共纳入63项研究,20454名受试者(68.18%为女性;平均年龄39.14岁)。整合专家见解与大型语言模型,开发一个三维框架,包括理论基础,人力支持和移动技术。干预标签由作者和ChatGPT独立编码。采用Cochrane风险偏倚2.0工具评估纳入研究的质量。使用贝叶斯网络元分析和贝叶斯元回归来探讨比较疗效和潜在的调节因子。该框架对19种移动应力干预措施进行了分类和比较,确定了优化的关键调节因素。压力管理项目、解决问题疗法和正念冥想名列前茅。没有确凿的证据表明人工支持或移动技术显著提高了干预结果。证据受到性别失衡和质量风险的影响,而元回归的有限统计能力在解释调节效应时需要谨慎。我们的研究结果为设计更有效和可扩展的压力干预措施提供了见解,并为减少卫生服务差距和推进可持续发展目标提供了有希望的策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis on the efficacy and potential of mobile interventions for stress management

A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis on the efficacy and potential of mobile interventions for stress management

The increasing prevalence of stress underscores the demand for effective, self-administered mobile mental health interventions, yet their efficacy and accessibility are still unclear. Here, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to classify self-administered mobile stress management interventions, compare their efficacy and examine their moderators. We searched PsycINFO, PubMed, Web of Science, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus and PsycARTICLES from database inception to 20 November 2023. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials on peer-reviewed, Internet-based, self-administered psychological interventions for stress reduction in healthy or subhealthy adults. A total of 63 studies with 20,454 participants were included (68.18% female; mean age 39.14 years). Integrated expert insights with large language models to develop a three-dimensional framework encompassing theoretical foundation, human support and mobile technology. Intervention labels were independently coded by the authors and ChatGPT. The included studies’ quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. Bayesian network meta-analysis and Bayesian meta-regression were used to explore comparative efficacy and potential moderators. The framework classified and compared 19 mobile stress interventions, identifying key moderating factors for optimization. Stress management programmes, problem-solving therapy and mindfulness meditation ranked the top. There was no conclusive evidence that human support or mobile technology significantly enhanced intervention outcomes. The evidence is subject to sex imbalance and quality risk, while the limited statistical power of meta-regression warrants caution in interpreting moderator effects. Our findings provide insights for designing more effective and scalable stress interventions and offer promising strategies to reduce health service disparities and advance the Sustainable Development Goals.

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
Nature Human Behaviour
Nature Human Behaviour Psychology-Social Psychology
CiteScore
36.80
自引率
1.00%
发文量
227
期刊介绍: Nature Human Behaviour is a journal that focuses on publishing research of outstanding significance into any aspect of human behavior.The research can cover various areas such as psychological, biological, and social bases of human behavior.It also includes the study of origins, development, and disorders related to human behavior.The primary aim of the journal is to increase the visibility of research in the field and enhance its societal reach and impact.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信