Digital health interventions for schizophrenia: Setting standards for mental health

Torous, John; Smith, Katharine A.; Hardy, Amy; Vinnikova, Anastasia; Blease, Charlotte; Milligan, Lea; Hidalgo-Mazzei, Diego; Lambe, Sinead; Marzano, Lisa; Uhlhaas, Peter J.; Ostinelli, Edoardo G.; Anmella, Gerard; Zangani, Caroline; Aronica, Rosario; Dwyer, Bridget; Cipriani, Andrea

doi:10.1016/j.schres.2024.04.013

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…During the process of the consensus meeting and the consensus recommendations, we implemented a thematic approach focusing broadly on digital interventions for psychosis. This enabled us to concentrate on an area of significant need where digital health innovation has the potential to be safe and effective [ 134 ]. However, we also found that, in taking this thematic approach, we identified broader issues, and the solutions proposed can apply to other fields of mental health.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this way, we aimed to engage a high-quality PPI coproduction rather than focusing purely on the number of PPI members involved. In addition, by adopting and building on new features of the consensus method used in our previous work [ 6 ] (eg, including a panel separate from the expert group and including PPIE members in the expert group and panel), we have strengthened international and multidisciplinary discussion on this important but often overlooked area [ 134 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Digital Mental Health for Schizophrenia and Other Severe Mental Illnesses: An International Consensus on Current Challenges and Potential Solutions

Smith,

Hardy,

Vinnikova

et al. 2024

JMIR Ment Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Digital approaches may be helpful in augmenting care to address unmet mental health needs, particularly for schizophrenia and severe mental illness (SMI). Objective An international multidisciplinary group was convened to reach a consensus on the challenges and potential solutions regarding collecting data, delivering treatment, and the ethical challenges in digital mental health approaches for schizophrenia and SMI. Methods The consensus development panel method was used, with an in-person meeting of 2 groups: the expert group and the panel. Membership was multidisciplinary including those with lived experience, with equal participation at all stages and coproduction of the consensus outputs and summary. Relevant literature was shared in advance of the meeting, and a systematic search of the recent literature on digital mental health interventions for schizophrenia and psychosis was completed to ensure that the panel was informed before the meeting with the expert group. Results Four broad areas of challenge and proposed solutions were identified: (1) user involvement for real coproduction; (2) new approaches to methodology in digital mental health, including agreed standards, data sharing, measuring harms, prevention strategies, and mechanistic research; (3) regulation and funding issues; and (4) implementation in real-world settings (including multidisciplinary collaboration, training, augmenting existing service provision, and social and population-focused approaches). Examples are provided with more detail on human-centered research design, lived experience perspectives, and biomedical ethics in digital mental health approaches for SMI. Conclusions The group agreed by consensus on a number of recommendations: (1) a new and improved approach to digital mental health research (with agreed reporting standards, data sharing, and shared protocols), (2) equal emphasis on social and population research as well as biological and psychological approaches, (3) meaningful collaborations across varied disciplines that have previously not worked closely together, (4) increased focus on the business model and product with planning and new funding structures across the whole development pathway, (5) increased focus and reporting on ethical issues and potential harms, and (6) organizational changes to allow for true communication and coproduction with those with lived experience of SMI. This study approach, combining an international expert meeting with patient and public involvement and engagement throughout the process, consensus methodology, discussion, and publication, is a helpful way to identify directions for future research and clinical implementation in rapidly evolving areas and can be combined with measurements of real-world clinical impact over time. Similar initiatives will be helpful in other areas of digital mental health and similarly fast-evolving fields to focus research and organizational change and effect improved real-world clinical implementation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Digital Mental Health for Schizophrenia and Other Severe Mental Illnesses: An International Consensus on Current Challenges and Potential Solutions

Smith,

Hardy,

Vinnikova

et al. 2024

JMIR Ment Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

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

Linardon,

Fuller-Tyszkiewicz,

Firth

et al. 2024

npj Digit. Med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Digital health interventions for schizophrenia: Setting standards for mental health

Cited by 2 publications

References 27 publications

Digital Mental Health for Schizophrenia and Other Severe Mental Illnesses: An International Consensus on Current Challenges and Potential Solutions

Digital Mental Health for Schizophrenia and Other Severe Mental Illnesses: An International Consensus on Current Challenges and Potential Solutions

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About