Cited by 25Digital Mental Health InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

Effects of digital psychotherapy for depression and anxiety: A systematic review and bayesian network meta-analysis

Wang, Min, Chen, Haoran, Yang, Fengchun, Xu, Xiaowei, Li, Jiao·2023·Journal of Affective Disorders

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of digital psychotherapies for depression and anxiety. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analyses (NMA) to make comparisons of digital psychotherapies.Methods A bayesian NMA was conducted in this study. The databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and CINAL were searched for all eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from Jan 1, 2012 to Oct 1, 2022. We used the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of bias tool for quality assessment. The primary outcomes were set as a standardized mean difference model in efficacy to describe continuous outcomes. We used STATA and WinBUGS to conduct a bayesian network meta-analysis of all interventions based on a random-effects model. This study was registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42022374558.Results From the retrieved 16,750 publications, we included 72 RCTs (13,096 participants) with the overall medium quality and above. In terms of depression scale, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) was more effective than TAU (SMDs 0.53) and NT (SMDs 0.98). In terms of anxiety scale, CBT (SMDs 0.68; SMDs 0.72) and exercise therapy (ERT) (SMDs 1.01; SMDs 1.05) were more effective than TAU and NT.Limitations Uneven quality of literature, simple network, and subjective judgment.Conclusion Based on NMA results, we suggest that CBT, which is the most commonly used digital technology, should be preferred among digital psychotherapy for relieving depression and anxiety symptoms. Digital exercise therapy is an effective strategy to relieve some anxiety problems in the context of COVID-19.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jad.2023.06.057

Cites

97 of 97 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wang, M., Chen, H., Yang, F., Xu, X., & Li, J.
Affiliations
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College (CN)
Corresponding author
Li, Jiao
Venue
Journal of Affective Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-10
Volume
338
Pages
569-580
ISSN
0165-0327 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4382542510
Cited by
25
References
97
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 2
FWCI
0.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Affective Disorders (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Hunan Provincial Science and Technology Department
  • Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences
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 › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
digital psychotherapy, depression, anxiety, cognitive behavioral therapy, exercise therapy, usual care, online intervention, COVID-19 pandemic, treatment efficacy comparison
MeSH terms
COVID-19, Anxiety, Depression, Humans, Psychotherapy

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