Cited by 112LGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyDigital Mental Health InterventionsMobile Health and mHealth Applications

Effectiveness, Acceptability, and Feasibility of Digital Health Interventions for LGBTIQ+ Young People: Systematic Review

Open access
Gilbey, Dylan, Morgan, Helen, Lin, Ashleigh, Perry, Yael·2020·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Background: Young people (aged 12-25 years) with diverse sexuality, gender, or bodily characteristics, such as those who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex, or queer (LGBTIQ+), are at substantially greater risk of a range of mental, physical, and sexual health difficulties compared with their peers. Digital health interventions have been identified as a potential way to reduce these health disparities. Objective: This review aims to summarize the characteristics of existing evidence-based digital health interventions for LGBTIQ+ young people and to describe the evidence for their effectiveness, acceptability, and feasibility. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted using internet databases and gray literature sources, and the results were screened for inclusion. The included studies were synthesized qualitatively. Results: The search identified 38 studies of 24 unique interventions seeking to address mental, physical, or sexual health–related concerns in LGBTIQ+ young people. Substantially more evidence-based interventions existed for gay and bisexual men than for any other population group, and there were more interventions related to risk reduction of sexually transmitted infections than to any other health concern. There was some evidence for the effectiveness, feasibility, and acceptability of these interventions overall; however, the quality of evidence is often lacking. Conclusions: There is sufficient evidence to suggest that targeted digital health interventions are an important focus for future research aimed at addressing health difficulties in LGBTIQ+ young people. Additional digital health interventions are needed for a wider range of health difficulties, particularly in terms of mental and physical health concerns, as well as more targeted interventions for same gender–attracted women, trans and gender-diverse people, and people with intersex variations. Trial Registration: PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42020128164; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=128164

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 · 10.2196/20158

Cites

104 of 104 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?

  • A recent systematic review concluded that there were more digital health interventions for LGBTQ+ participants aiming at reducing sexually transmitted diseases than for other health concerns and that more targeted interventions are needed to cover mental health difficulties.

    “A recent systematic review [12] on digital health interventions for LGBTQ+ participants concluded that there were more interventions aiming at reducing sexually transmitted diseases than for other health concerns and that more targeted interventions are needed to cover mental health”

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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [65]Martin S Developing and Evaluating Queervibe: an Online Intervention to Empower Trans and Non-binary Youth Doctoral Dissertation, Anglia Ruskin University 2019 2020-11-16 https://arro.anglia.ac.uk/704647/

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gilbey, D., Morgan, H., Lin, A., & Perry, Y.
Affiliations
The Kids Research Institute Australia (AU)
Corresponding author
Gilbey, Dylan
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2020-12-03
Volume
22
Issue
12
Pages
e20158
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3095043366
Cited by
112
References
104
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 9
FWCI
1.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Murdoch University Research Portal (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • UWA Profiles and Research Repository (UWA) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Murdoch University Research Portal (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Australian Government
  • Medical Research Council
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (1148793)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
Keywords
digital health interventions, sexual and gender minority youth, intervention effectiveness, acceptability, feasibility, mental health, physical health, sexual health, STD prevention, intersex youth, health disparities
MeSH terms
Sexual and Gender Minorities, Adolescent, Adult, Child, Delivery of Health Care, Feasibility Studies, Female, Humans, Male, Surveys and Questionnaires, Young Adult

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