Systematic review and meta-analysis of adverse events in clinical trials of mental health apps

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. Th...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jake Linardon, Matthew Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, Joseph Firth, Simon B. Goldberg, Cleo Anderson, Zoe McClure, John Torous
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Nature Portfolio 2024-12-01
Series:npj Digital Medicine
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-024-01388-y
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1846112111456944128
author Jake Linardon
Matthew Fuller-Tyszkiewicz
Joseph Firth
Simon B. Goldberg
Cleo Anderson
Zoe McClure
John Torous
author_facet Jake Linardon
Matthew Fuller-Tyszkiewicz
Joseph Firth
Simon B. Goldberg
Cleo Anderson
Zoe McClure
John Torous
author_sort Jake Linardon
collection DOAJ
description 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, I 2 = 75%). Deterioration rates did not differ between app and control groups (OR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.62–1.01, I 2 = 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.
format Article
id doaj-art-56646abb0df94bc2b0fd9c7cc6828cc5
institution Kabale University
issn 2398-6352
language English
publishDate 2024-12-01
publisher Nature Portfolio
record_format Article
series npj Digital Medicine
spelling doaj-art-56646abb0df94bc2b0fd9c7cc6828cc52024-12-22T12:49:40ZengNature Portfolionpj Digital Medicine2398-63522024-12-017112210.1038/s41746-024-01388-ySystematic review and meta-analysis of adverse events in clinical trials of mental health appsJake Linardon0Matthew Fuller-Tyszkiewicz1Joseph Firth2Simon B. Goldberg3Cleo Anderson4Zoe McClure5John Torous6School of Psychology, Deakin UniversitySchool of Psychology, Deakin UniversityDivision of Psychology and Mental Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science CentreDepartment of Counselling Psychology, University of Wisconsin – MadisonSchool of Psychology, Deakin UniversitySchool of Psychology, Deakin UniversityDivision of Digital Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical SchoolAbstract 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 2 = 75%). Deterioration rates did not differ between app and control groups (OR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.62–1.01, I 2 = 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.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-024-01388-y
spellingShingle Jake Linardon
Matthew Fuller-Tyszkiewicz
Joseph Firth
Simon B. Goldberg
Cleo Anderson
Zoe McClure
John Torous
Systematic review and meta-analysis of adverse events in clinical trials of mental health apps
npj Digital Medicine
title Systematic review and meta-analysis of adverse events in clinical trials of mental health apps
title_full Systematic review and meta-analysis of adverse events in clinical trials of mental health apps
title_fullStr Systematic review and meta-analysis of adverse events in clinical trials of mental health apps
title_full_unstemmed Systematic review and meta-analysis of adverse events in clinical trials of mental health apps
title_short Systematic review and meta-analysis of adverse events in clinical trials of mental health apps
title_sort systematic review and meta analysis of adverse events in clinical trials of mental health apps
url https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-024-01388-y
work_keys_str_mv AT jakelinardon systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofadverseeventsinclinicaltrialsofmentalhealthapps
AT matthewfullertyszkiewicz systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofadverseeventsinclinicaltrialsofmentalhealthapps
AT josephfirth systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofadverseeventsinclinicaltrialsofmentalhealthapps
AT simonbgoldberg systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofadverseeventsinclinicaltrialsofmentalhealthapps
AT cleoanderson systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofadverseeventsinclinicaltrialsofmentalhealthapps
AT zoemcclure systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofadverseeventsinclinicaltrialsofmentalhealthapps
AT johntorous systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofadverseeventsinclinicaltrialsofmentalhealthapps