Cited by 101Digital Mental Health InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Treatment and Access

The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of e-health interventions for depression and anxiety in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Open access
Massoudi, Btissame, Holvast, Floor, Bockting, Claudi L.H., Burger, Huibert, Blanker, Marco H.·2019·Journal of Affective Disorders

Abstract

Purpose Psychological interventions are labor-intensive and expensive, but e-health interventions may support them in primary care. In this study, we systematically reviewed the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of e-health interventions for depressive and anxiety symptoms and disorders in primary care.Methods We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane library, Embase, and PsychINFO until January 2018, for randomized controlled trials of e-health interventions for depression or anxiety in primary care. Two reviewers independently screened the identified publications, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool.Results Out of 3617 publications, we included 14 that compared 33 treatments in 4183 participants. Overall, the methodological quality was poor to fair. The pooled effect size of e-health interventions was small (standardized mean difference = -0.19, 95%CI -0.31 to -0.06) for depression compared to control groups in the short-term, but this was maintained in the long-term (standardized mean difference = -0.22, 95%CI -0.35 to -0.09). Further analysis showed that e-health for depression had a small effect compared to care as usual and a moderate effect compared to waiting lists. One trial on anxiety showed no significant results. Four trials reported on cost-effectiveness.Limitations The trials studied different types of e-health interventions and had several risks of bias. Moreover, only one study was included for anxiety.Conclusions E-health interventions for depression have a small effect in primary care, with a moderate effect compared to waiting lists. The approach also appeared to be cost-effective for depression. However, we found no evidence for its effectiveness for anxiety.

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.jad.2018.11.050

Cites

72 of 72 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?

  • Offering online MBIs may have unique benefits of increased accessibility and scalability, thereby lowering the threshold for participation and potential cost-effectiveness.

    “However, offering these interventions in an online format may have unique benefits of increased accessibility and scalability, thereby lowering the threshold for participation [136] and potential cost-effectiveness [137].”

    From New evidence in the booming field of online mindfulness: An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (2021) · cites this paper as [137]

    The Summary of main findings (§4.1; page unavailable) reports initial evidence that e-health interventions in primary care may be cost-effective, supporting the point attached to citation [137]. The review concerns e-health interventions for depression and anxiety, not online mindfulness-based interventions specifically, so it does not establish their cost-effectiveness. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Despite internet interventions' attested efficacy in treating various mental health conditions and potential cost-effectiveness, internet interventions targeting cancer survivors are scant.

    “Nevertheless, despite internet interventions’ attested efficacy [21] in treating various mental health conditions and its potential cost-effectiveness [22,23], internet interventions targeting cancer survivors are scant [24].”
  • The dependence of care as usual on health care system and setting contributes to extensive heterogeneity between trials.

    “This contributes to extensive heterogeneity between trials. 595”

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

1 of the 73 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Lefebvre, C, Manheimer, E, Glanville, J, 2011. Chapter 6: Searching for studies. Cochrane Handbook For Systematic Reviews of Interventions. The Cochrane Collaboration 2011th ed.
  2. Tulbure, BT, 2011. The efficacy of internet-supported intervention for social anxiety disorder: a brief meta-analytic review 30. Procedia -Social and Behavioral Sciences 2011, pp. 552-557.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Massoudi, B., Holvast, F., Bockting, C. L. H., Burger, H., & Blanker, M. H.
Affiliations
  • University Medical Center Groningen (NL)
  • University of Groningen (NL)
Corresponding author
Massoudi, Btissame
Venue
Journal of Affective Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-02
Volume
245
Pages
728-743
ISSN
0165-0327 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2900267347
Cited by
101
References
73
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 4
FWCI
1.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Affective Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
digital health interventions, depression, anxiety, primary care, cost-effectiveness, digital mental health, waiting list comparison, usual care, psychological intervention
MeSH terms
Anxiety, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Depression, Humans, Primary Health Care, Waiting Lists, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Telemedicine

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