Zhao Hui Koh, Duygu Serbetci, Jason Skues, Greg Murray
{"title":"迈向普通人群心理健康的数字自我监测:对现有自我报告测量方法的范围审查","authors":"Zhao Hui Koh, Duygu Serbetci, Jason Skues, Greg Murray","doi":"10.2196/59351","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>With the ubiquity of smartphones, digital self-report instruments have enormous potential to support the general population in monitoring their mental health. A primary challenge for researchers committed to advancing this work is simply to scope the plethora of widely used candidate instruments. The overarching aim of this study was to address this challenge to support and guide future research in this burgeoning area.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to conduct a literature review of self-report instruments used in empirical studies to measure mental health (1) in the general population, (2) delivered in a digital format, and (3) in longitudinal designs. Given the wide range of recognized \"mental health\" constructs, the review's search strategies were guided by Keyes' dual continua model of mental health, recognizing both deficits- and strengths-based constructs. This study's primary objective was to develop a first-of-its-kind ranking and synthesis of the most frequently used instruments that are potentially suitable for mental health self-monitoring. It was not an objective of this study to evaluate psychometric properties of the identified instruments-we hope the present ranking and synthesis will provide the foundation for future research into optimal digital, prospective self-report of mental health.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Five major electronic databases were searched. Studies that administered digital mental health instruments (in English) repeatedly to community dwellers in the general adult population were eligible. The included studies were grouped by instruments for synthesis using a narrative approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Preliminary screening of 95,849 records identified 8460 eligible records, among which 1000 records were randomly selected over 4 iterations for full-text screening. A total of 223 records were included. We found that the top 30 most commonly used instruments accounted for 78.4% (308/393) of the total usage across studies. These instruments predominantly measure deficits-based mental health constructs. The Patient Health Questionnaire 9 Items and Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7 Items were by far the most used instruments. The most commonly measured strengths-based constructs were life satisfaction and mental well-being.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The findings of this review strongly suggest that scientific investigation of mental health constructs across time on digital platforms still prioritizes deficits-focused instruments originally developed for pen-and-paper administration using classical test theory. These findings are discussed in light of evidence in the literature that deficits-focused instruments demonstrate inferior distributional properties (floor effects) in the general population and theory suggesting that both deficits- and strengths-focused measurements are required to holistically assess mental health. Limitations of the review include the restricted focus on English language instruments and the pragmatic approach to selecting records for full-text screening. It is concluded that, in the smartphone age, it would be timely to develop new digital instruments framed by holistic models of mental health and using contemporary test construction approaches.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42022306547; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42022306547.</p><p><strong>International registered report identifier (irrid): </strong>RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2022-065162.</p>","PeriodicalId":48616,"journal":{"name":"Jmir Mental Health","volume":"12 ","pages":"e59351"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Toward Digital Self-Monitoring of Mental Health in the General Population: Scoping Review of Existing Approaches to Self-Report Measurement.\",\"authors\":\"Zhao Hui Koh, Duygu Serbetci, Jason Skues, Greg Murray\",\"doi\":\"10.2196/59351\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>With the ubiquity of smartphones, digital self-report instruments have enormous potential to support the general population in monitoring their mental health. A primary challenge for researchers committed to advancing this work is simply to scope the plethora of widely used candidate instruments. The overarching aim of this study was to address this challenge to support and guide future research in this burgeoning area.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to conduct a literature review of self-report instruments used in empirical studies to measure mental health (1) in the general population, (2) delivered in a digital format, and (3) in longitudinal designs. Given the wide range of recognized \\\"mental health\\\" constructs, the review's search strategies were guided by Keyes' dual continua model of mental health, recognizing both deficits- and strengths-based constructs. This study's primary objective was to develop a first-of-its-kind ranking and synthesis of the most frequently used instruments that are potentially suitable for mental health self-monitoring. It was not an objective of this study to evaluate psychometric properties of the identified instruments-we hope the present ranking and synthesis will provide the foundation for future research into optimal digital, prospective self-report of mental health.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Five major electronic databases were searched. Studies that administered digital mental health instruments (in English) repeatedly to community dwellers in the general adult population were eligible. The included studies were grouped by instruments for synthesis using a narrative approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Preliminary screening of 95,849 records identified 8460 eligible records, among which 1000 records were randomly selected over 4 iterations for full-text screening. A total of 223 records were included. We found that the top 30 most commonly used instruments accounted for 78.4% (308/393) of the total usage across studies. These instruments predominantly measure deficits-based mental health constructs. The Patient Health Questionnaire 9 Items and Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7 Items were by far the most used instruments. The most commonly measured strengths-based constructs were life satisfaction and mental well-being.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The findings of this review strongly suggest that scientific investigation of mental health constructs across time on digital platforms still prioritizes deficits-focused instruments originally developed for pen-and-paper administration using classical test theory. These findings are discussed in light of evidence in the literature that deficits-focused instruments demonstrate inferior distributional properties (floor effects) in the general population and theory suggesting that both deficits- and strengths-focused measurements are required to holistically assess mental health. Limitations of the review include the restricted focus on English language instruments and the pragmatic approach to selecting records for full-text screening. It is concluded that, in the smartphone age, it would be timely to develop new digital instruments framed by holistic models of mental health and using contemporary test construction approaches.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42022306547; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42022306547.</p><p><strong>International registered report identifier (irrid): </strong>RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2022-065162.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48616,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Jmir Mental Health\",\"volume\":\"12 \",\"pages\":\"e59351\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Jmir Mental Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2196/59351\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jmir Mental Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/59351","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Toward Digital Self-Monitoring of Mental Health in the General Population: Scoping Review of Existing Approaches to Self-Report Measurement.
Background: With the ubiquity of smartphones, digital self-report instruments have enormous potential to support the general population in monitoring their mental health. A primary challenge for researchers committed to advancing this work is simply to scope the plethora of widely used candidate instruments. The overarching aim of this study was to address this challenge to support and guide future research in this burgeoning area.
Objective: This study aimed to conduct a literature review of self-report instruments used in empirical studies to measure mental health (1) in the general population, (2) delivered in a digital format, and (3) in longitudinal designs. Given the wide range of recognized "mental health" constructs, the review's search strategies were guided by Keyes' dual continua model of mental health, recognizing both deficits- and strengths-based constructs. This study's primary objective was to develop a first-of-its-kind ranking and synthesis of the most frequently used instruments that are potentially suitable for mental health self-monitoring. It was not an objective of this study to evaluate psychometric properties of the identified instruments-we hope the present ranking and synthesis will provide the foundation for future research into optimal digital, prospective self-report of mental health.
Methods: Five major electronic databases were searched. Studies that administered digital mental health instruments (in English) repeatedly to community dwellers in the general adult population were eligible. The included studies were grouped by instruments for synthesis using a narrative approach.
Results: Preliminary screening of 95,849 records identified 8460 eligible records, among which 1000 records were randomly selected over 4 iterations for full-text screening. A total of 223 records were included. We found that the top 30 most commonly used instruments accounted for 78.4% (308/393) of the total usage across studies. These instruments predominantly measure deficits-based mental health constructs. The Patient Health Questionnaire 9 Items and Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7 Items were by far the most used instruments. The most commonly measured strengths-based constructs were life satisfaction and mental well-being.
Conclusions: The findings of this review strongly suggest that scientific investigation of mental health constructs across time on digital platforms still prioritizes deficits-focused instruments originally developed for pen-and-paper administration using classical test theory. These findings are discussed in light of evidence in the literature that deficits-focused instruments demonstrate inferior distributional properties (floor effects) in the general population and theory suggesting that both deficits- and strengths-focused measurements are required to holistically assess mental health. Limitations of the review include the restricted focus on English language instruments and the pragmatic approach to selecting records for full-text screening. It is concluded that, in the smartphone age, it would be timely to develop new digital instruments framed by holistic models of mental health and using contemporary test construction approaches.
期刊介绍:
JMIR Mental Health (JMH, ISSN 2368-7959) is a PubMed-indexed, peer-reviewed sister journal of JMIR, the leading eHealth journal (Impact Factor 2016: 5.175).
JMIR Mental Health focusses on digital health and Internet interventions, technologies and electronic innovations (software and hardware) for mental health, addictions, online counselling and behaviour change. This includes formative evaluation and system descriptions, theoretical papers, review papers, viewpoint/vision papers, and rigorous evaluations.