4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      Submit your digital health research with an established publisher
      - celebrating 25 years of open access

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The Effect of Digital Mental Health Literacy Interventions on Mental Health: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

      review-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Accelerated by technological advancements and the recent global pandemic, there is burgeoning interest in digital mental health literacy (DMHL) interventions that can positively affect mental health. However, existing work remains inconclusive regarding the effectiveness of DMHL interventions.

          Objective

          This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the components and modes of DMHL interventions, their moderating factors, and their long-term impacts on mental health literacy and mental health.

          Methods

          We used a random-effects model to conduct meta-analyses and meta-regressions on moderating effects of DMHL interventions on mental health.

          Results

          Using 144 interventions with 206 effect sizes, we found a moderate effect of DMHL interventions in enhancing distal mental health outcomes (standardized mean difference=0.42, 95% CI −0.10 to 0.73; P<.001) and a large effect in increasing proximal mental health literacy outcomes (standardized mean difference=0.65, 95% CI 0.59-0.74; P<.001). Uptake of DMHL interventions was comparable with that of control conditions, and uptake of DMHL interventions did not moderate the effects on both proximal mental health literacy outcomes and distal mental health outcomes. DMHL interventions were as effective as face-to-face interventions and did not differ by platform type or dosage. DMHL plus interventions (DMHL psychoeducation coupled with other active treatment) produced large effects in bolstering mental health, were more effective than DMHL only interventions (self-help DMHL psychoeducation), and were comparable with non-DMHL interventions (treatment as usual). DMHL interventions demonstrated positive effects on mental health that were sustained over follow-up assessments and were most effective in enhancing the mental health of emerging and older adults.

          Conclusions

          For theory building, our review and meta-analysis found that DMHL interventions are as effective as face-to-face interventions. DMHL interventions confer optimal effects on mental health when DMHL psychoeducation is combined with informal, nonprofessional active treatment components such as skills training and peer support, which demonstrate comparable effectiveness with that of treatment as usual (client-professional interactions and therapies). These effects, which did not differ by platform type or dosage, were sustained over time. Additionally, most DMHL interventions are found in Western cultural contexts, especially in high-income countries (Global North) such as Australia, the United States, and the United Kingdom, and limited research is conducted in low-income countries in Asia and in South American and African countries. Most of the DMHL studies did not report information on the racial or ethnic makeup of the samples. Future work on DMHL interventions that target racial or ethnic minority groups, particularly the design, adoption, and evaluation of the effects of culturally adaptive DMHL interventions on uptake and mental health functioning, is needed. Such evidence can drive the adoption and implementation of DMHL interventions at scale, which represents a key foundation for practice-changing impact in the provision of mental health resources for individuals and the community.

          Trial Registration

          PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42023363995; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42023363995

          Related collections

          Most cited references101

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials

            Flaws in the design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of randomised trials can cause the effect of an intervention to be underestimated or overestimated. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias aims to make the process clearer and more accurate
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Conducting Meta-Analyses inRwith themetaforPackage

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                J Med Internet Res
                J Med Internet Res
                JMIR
                Journal of Medical Internet Research
                JMIR Publications (Toronto, Canada )
                1439-4456
                1438-8871
                2024
                29 February 2024
                : 26
                : e51268
                Affiliations
                [1 ] N.1 Institute for Health National University of Singapore Singapore Singapore
                [2 ] School of Education University of California, Irvine Irvine, CA United States
                [3 ] SHINE Children and Youth Services, Singapore Singapore Singapore
                Author notes
                Corresponding Author: Stephanie M Reich smreich@ 123456uci.edu
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5817-990X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8799-5236
                https://orcid.org/0009-0000-8437-6096
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6715-415X
                Article
                v26i1e51268
                10.2196/51268
                10941000
                38421687
                6ebdb918-2bdc-4edb-a712-3467235c6448
                ©GeckHong Yeo, Stephanie M Reich, Nicole A Liaw, Elizabeth Yee Min Chia. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 29.02.2024.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://www.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

                History
                : 26 July 2023
                : 5 September 2023
                : 25 October 2023
                : 25 December 2023
                Categories
                Review
                Review

                Medicine
                review and meta-analysis,digital mental health literacy,digital mental health interventions,mental health functioning

                Comments

                Comment on this article