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

Jake Linardon, Matthew Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, Joseph Firth, Simon B. Goldberg, Cleo Anderson, Zoe McClure, John Torous

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

21 Citations (Scopus)

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.
Original languageEnglish
Article number363
Journalnpj Digital Medicine
Volume7
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2024
Externally publishedYes

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2024.

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Systematic review and meta-analysis of adverse events in clinical trials of mental health apps'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this