Background Digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) have been increasingly deployed to bridge gaps in mental health care, particularly given their promising efficacy. Nevertheless, attrition among DMHI users remains high. In response, human support has been studied as a means of improving retention to and outcomes of DMHIs. Although a growing number of studies and meta-analyses have investigated the effects of human support for DMHIs on mental health outcomes, systematic empirical evidence of its effectiveness across mental health domains remains scant. Objective We aimed to summarize the results of meta-analyses of human support versus no support for DMHI use across various outcome domains, participant samples, and support providers. Methods We conducted a systematic meta-review of meta-analyses, comparing the effects of human support with those of no support for DMHI use, with the goal of qualitatively summarizing data across various outcome domains, participant samples, and support providers. We used MEDLINE, PubMed, and PsycINFO electronic databases. Articles were included if the study had a quantitative meta-analysis study design; the intervention targeted mental health symptoms and was delivered via a technology platform (excluding person-delivered interventions mediated through telehealth, text messages, or social media); the outcome variables included mental health symptoms such as anxiety, depression, stress, posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms, or a number of these symptoms together; and the study included quantitative comparisons of outcomes in which human support versus those when no or minimal human support was provided. Results The results of 31 meta-analyses (505 unique primary studies) were analyzed. The meta-analyses reported 45 effect sizes; almost half (n=22, 48%) of them showed that human-supported DMHIs were significantly more effective than unsupported DMHIs. A total of 9% (4/45) of effect sizes showed that unsupported DMHIs were significantly more effective. No clear patterns of results emerged regarding the efficacy of human support for the outcomes assessed (including anxiety, depression, posttraumatic stress disorder, stress, and multiple outcomes). Human-supported DMHIs may be more effective than unsupported DMHIs for individuals with elevated mental health symptoms. There were no clear results regarding the type of training for those providing support. Conclusions Our findings highlight the potential of human support in improving the effects of DMHIs. Specifically, evidence emerged for stronger effects of human support for individuals with greater symptom severity. There was considerable heterogeneity across meta-analyses in the level of detail regarding the nature of the interventions, population served, and support delivered, making it difficult to draw strong conclusions regarding the circumstances under which human support is most effective. Future research should emphasize reporting detailed descriptions of sample and intervention characteristics and describe the mechanism through which they believe the coach will be most useful for the DMHI.

No abstract

No abstract

Objective Bipolar (BP) disorder is a highly morbid disorder that is often misdiagnosed or undiagnosed and affects a large number of adults and children. Due to the coronavirus disease 2019 public health emergency stay at home orders, most outpatient mental health care was provided via telepsychiatry, and the many benefits of virtual care ensure that this will continue as an ongoing practice. The main aim of this review was to investigate what is currently known about the use of telepsychiatry services in the diagnosis and treatment of BP disorder across the lifespan. Method A systematic literature review assessing the use of telepsychiatry in BP disorder was conducted in PubMed, PsychINFO, and Medline. Results Six articles were included in the final review. All included articles assessed populations aged 17 years or older. The literature indicates that BP disorder was addressed in telepsychiatry services at a similar rate as in‐person services, reliable diagnoses can be made using remote interviews, satisfaction rates are comparable to in‐person services, telepsychiatry services are able to reach and impact patients with BP disorder, are sustainable, and patient outcomes can improve using a telepsychiatry intervention. Conclusions Given the morbidity of BP disorder, the research addressing the telepsychiatry diagnosis and treatment of BP disorder is sparse, with only emerging evidence of its reliability, effectiveness, and acceptance. There is no research assessing the safety and efficacy of telepsychiatry in pediatric populations with BP disorder. Given the morbidity associated with BP disorder at any age, further research is needed to determine how to safely and effectively incorporate telepsychiatry into clinical care for BP adult and pediatric patients.

No abstract