Cited by 45Digital Mental Health InterventionsMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation

Efficacy of digital health interventions in youth with chronic medical conditions: A meta-analysis

Open access
Domhardt, Matthias, Schröder, Annalena, Geirhos, Agnes, Steubl, Lena, Baumeister, Harald·2021·Internet Interventions

Abstract

Digital health interventions might extend service provisions for youth with chronic medical conditions (CC) and comorbid mental health symptoms. We aimed to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy of Internet- and mobile-based interventions (IMIs) for different psychological and disease-related outcomes in children and adolescents with CC. Studies were identified by systematic searches in CENTRAL, Embase, MEDLINE/PubMed and PsycINFO, complemented by searches in reference lists of eligible studies and other reviews. We included studies, when they were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of an IMI to control conditions in improving psychological and disease-related outcomes in youth (mean age ≤ 18 years) with CC. Study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were conducted independently by two reviewers. Meta-analyses were performed within a random-effects model, and Hedges' g (with 95% confidence intervals) was calculated as effect size measure. Primary outcomes were comorbid mental health symptoms (i.e., depression, anxiety and stress), as well as quality of life and self-efficacy. A total of 19 randomized controlled trials (2410 patients) were included in this meta-analysis. IMIs were associated with improvements in self-efficacy (g = 0.38; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.61; I2 = 0) and combined disease-related outcomes (g = −0.13; 95% CI, −0.25 to −0.01; I2 = 21). Meta-analyses on other outcomes were non-significant, and some pre-planned analyses were not feasible because of a shortage of studies. The available evidence on IMIs for improving mental and health-related outcomes in youth with CC is limited. Our findings point to a rather small benefit and limited efficacy. Future research is needed, to comprehensively assess the potential of IMIs to extend collaborative care, and to identify factors contributing to improved user-centered interventions with better treatment outcomes.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.invent.2021.100373

Cites

90 of 90 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Domhardt, M., Schröder, A., Geirhos, A., Steubl, L., & Baumeister, H.
Affiliations
Universität Ulm (DE)
Corresponding author
Domhardt, Matthias
Venue
Internet Interventions
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-04
Volume
24
Pages
100373
ISSN
2214-7829 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3129218224
Cited by
45
References
90
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 5
FWCI
1.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Internet Interventions (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (FKZ 01GL1740A, FKZ 01GL1740E)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Keywords
digital health interventions, online intervention, mobile health, chronic disease, children and adolescents, depression, anxiety, stress, quality of life, self-efficacy, collaborative care

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review