Cited by 417Digital Mental Health InterventionsTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationMental Health Treatment and Access

E-Mental Health: A Rapid Review of the Literature

Lal, Shalini, Adair, Carol E.·2014·Psychiatric Services

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The authors conducted a review of the literature on e-mental health, including its applications, strengths, limitations, and evidence base. METHODS: The rapid review approach, an emerging type of knowledge synthesis, was used in response to a request for information from policy makers. MEDLINE was searched from 2005 to 2010 by using relevant terms. The search was supplemented with a general Internet search and a search focused on key authors. RESULTS: A total of 115 documents were reviewed: 94% were peer-reviewed articles, and 51% described primary research. Most of the research (76%) originated in the United States, Australia, or the Netherlands. The review identified e-mental health applications addressing four areas of mental health service delivery: information provision; screening, assessment, and monitoring; intervention; and social support. Currently, applications are most frequently aimed at adults with depression or anxiety disorders. Some interventions have demonstrated effectiveness in early trials. Many believe that e-mental health has enormous potential to address the gap between the identified need for services and the limited capacity and resources to provide conventional treatment. Strengths of e-mental health initiatives noted in the literature include improved accessibility, reduced costs (although start-up and research and development costs are necessary), flexibility in terms of standardization and personalization, interactivity, and consumer engagement. CONCLUSIONS: E-mental health applications are proliferating and hold promise to expand access to care. Further discussion and research are needed on how to effectively incorporate e-mental health into service systems and to apply it to diverse populations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1176/appi.ps.201300009

Cites

106 of 106 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
Lal, S., & Adair, C. E.
Affiliations
University of Calgary (CA)
Venue
Psychiatric Services
Published
2014-01
Volume
65
Issue
1
Pages
24-32
ISSN
  • 0022-1597 (ISSN-L)
  • 1075-2730
  • 1557-9700
OpenAlex
W2155300577
Cited by
417
References
106
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 51 · 2022: 42 · 2021: 46 · 2020: 54 · 2019: 40 · 2018: 44 · 2017: 38 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 5
FWCI
23.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychiatric Services (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
American Psychological Association
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
e-mental health, digital mental health interventions, depression, anxiety disorders, mental health service delivery, social support, access to mental health care, customer engagement, rapid review
MeSH terms
Humans, Mental Health Services, 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