A scoping review of mental health mobile apps for use by the military community
Open accessAbstract
Advancements in technology have opened doors to new directions in mental health care, including the emergence of mobile health applications. Such apps are helping to make mental health care more accessible to those who face barriers to care, such as military personnel. We conducted a scoping review to map the existing literature on mental health-related apps intended for use by military personnel/veterans. As a result, we identified several themes from the literature. We also discuss how apps are being developed and tested for use by the military community and provide suggestions for future research directions.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
Users who complete treatment sessions can retain tools for future use or reference to their care.
“When users complete treatment sessions, they have the ability to retain these tools for future use or reference to their care [30,50].”
From Efficacy, Effectiveness, and Quality of Resilience-Building Mobile Health Apps for Military, Veteran, and Public Safety Personnel Populations: Scoping Literature Review and App Evaluation (2022) · cites this paper as [50]
The section on mobile apps’ purposes (page not provided) says users can store information to share with a health care provider at future appointments. The review also describes portable resources used between outpatient sessions, but it does not say users retain the tools after completing treatment sessions. (LLM, conf=0.78)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredHCP support may include providing learning sessions before use to increase efficacy and optimal use patterns, weekly phone check-ins, or using apps to enhance existing therapeutic interactions between clinicians and users.
“This may include providing learning sessions before use to increase efficacy and optimal use patterns, weekly phone check-ins, or using the apps to enhance existing therapeutic interactions between clinicians and users [43,48-50].”
From Efficacy, Effectiveness, and Quality of Resilience-Building Mobile Health Apps for Military, Veteran, and Public Safety Personnel Populations: Scoping Literature Review and App Evaluation (2022) · cites this paper as [50]
The section ‘Theme 1: diverse range of mobile app’s purpose’ (page not available) says that some apps enhance existing therapeutic interactions between users and counsellors, including communication with a therapist. It does not describe learning sessions before use or weekly phone check-ins; its separate account of Stay Quit Coach mentions monthly follow-up therapy sessions instead. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredMany of the apps identified in the studies relied on user feedback to conclude whether the application was clinically effective.
“Instead, many of the apps identified in the studies relied on user feedback to conclude whether the application was clinically effective [50].”
From Efficacy, Effectiveness, and Quality of Resilience-Building Mobile Health Apps for Military, Veteran, and Public Safety Personnel Populations: Scoping Literature Review and App Evaluation (2022) · cites this paper as [50]
The Discussion says that currently available apps rely on users to determine clinical effectiveness for themselves, and that many reviewed studies assessed users’ attitudes and ease of use. It does not say that the studies used user feedback to conclude the apps were clinically effective; it notes that only nine articles used randomized trials to test efficacy. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 45 · Cited by 11
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Wood VM, Linden B, Tam-Seto L, et al. Military Personnel, Families, and Veterans, We Are #Here4U: Introducing our E-Solution for Military Mental Wellness. Poster presentation at the Canadian Academy of Canadian Epidemiology 2018 Annual Scientific Symposium, Toronto, ON. 2018.
- Authors
- Tam-Seto, L., Wood, V. M., Linden, B., & Stuart, H.
- Affiliations
- Queen's University (CA)
- Venue
- mHealth
- Publisher
- AME Publishing Company
- Published
- 2018-12
- Volume
- 4
- Pages
- 57-57
- ISSN
- 2306-9740 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC6327160
- OpenAlex
- W2904771409
- Cited by
- 11
- References
- 45
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2
- FWCI
- 0.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-nd
- Locations
- mHealth (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
- Keywords
- military personnel, veterans, mobile health, access to mental health care, barriers to care, military mental health
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
