Cited by 268Digital Mental Health InterventionsMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsSchizophrenia research and treatment

Smartphone Apps for Schizophrenia: A Systematic Review

Open access
Firth, Joseph, Torous, John·2015·JMIR mHealth and uHealth

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is increasing interest in using mobile technologies such as smartphones for improving the care of patients with schizophrenia. However, less is known about the current clinical evidence for the feasibility and effectiveness of smartphone apps in this population. OBJECTIVE: To review the published literature of smartphone apps applied for the care of patients with schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders. METHODS: An electronic database search of Ovid MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Health Technology Assessment Database, Allied and Complementary Medicine, Health and Psychosocial Instruments, PsycINFO, and Embase was conducted on May 24, 2015. All eligible studies were systematically reviewed, and proportional meta-analyses were applied to pooled data on recruitment, retention, and adherence to examine the overall feasibility of smartphone interventions for schizophrenia. RESULTS: Our search produced 226 results from which 7 eligible articles were identified, reporting on 5 studies of smartphone apps for patients with schizophrenia. All examined feasibility, and one assessed the preliminary efficacy of a smartphone intervention for schizophrenia. Study lengths varied between 6 and 130 days. Overall retention was 92% (95% CI 82-98%). Participants consistently used the smartphone apps on more than 85% of days during the study period, averaging 3.95 interactions per person per day. Furthermore, participants responded to 71.9% of automated prompts (95% CI 65.7-77.8%). Participants reported a range of potential benefits from the various interventions, and user experience was largely positive. CONCLUSIONS: Although small, the current published literature demonstrates strong evidence for the feasibility of using smartphones to enhance the care of people with schizophrenia. High rates of engagement and satisfaction with a broad range of apps suggest the nascent potential of this mobile technology. However, there remains limited data on the efficacy of such interventions.

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/mhealth.4930

Cites

30 of 30 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?

  • People at risk for a psychotic episode and those who just experienced their first psychotic episode were most likely to use the app.

    “It also states that people at risk for a psychotic episode and those who just experienced their first psychotic episode were most likely to use the app.”

    From Mobile intervention for individuals with psychosis, dual disorders, and their common comorbidities: A literature review (2019) · cites this paper as [93]

    In Discussion > Findings From Reviewed Studies, the review reports the highest app adherence among participants classified as at risk for schizophrenia. It only suggests that at-risk or first-episode populations may be most willing and able to use smartphones; it does not report that first-episode participants were observed to be most likely to use the app. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Firth and Torous identified five applications evaluated in seven separate articles, primarily designed to promote self-management of disease.

    “a literature review by Firth and Torous (93) identified five applications, evaluated in seven separate articles—those apps were primarily designed to promote self-management of the disease.”

    From Mobile intervention for individuals with psychosis, dual disorders, and their common comorbidities: A literature review (2019) · cites this paper as [93]

    The Results > Search Findings section reports seven eligible studies from five independent trials, each using a unique app, supporting the counts of seven articles and five applications. But the Discussion > Limitations section describes varied aims—including symptom monitoring, recovery, and physical health—rather than establishing that the apps were primarily designed for disease self-management. No page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The majority of applications were very well received by participants, with an estimated average use of 85% of the days in which the studies were conducted, 3.95 times per day.

    “The authors report that the majority of applications were very well received by participants, with an estimated average use of 85% of the days in which the studies were conducted, 3.95 times per day.”
  • Research on digital mental health treatments for severe mental illness such as bipolar and psychotic disorders has shown feasibility, with more limited efficacy data.

    “Research on DMHTs for severe mental illness, such as bipolar and psychotic disorders, has shown feasibility, although efficacy data remain more limited (33, 34).”

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. [2]Aaron S Chapter One: A Portrait of Smartphone Ownership 2015 4 1 2015-07-08 Washington, DC PewResearchCenter http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/04/01/chapter-one-a-portrait-of-smartphone-ownership/ 6ZsC8HUFA

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Firth, J., & Torous, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Manchester (GB)
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Torous, John
Venue
JMIR mHealth and uHealth
Published
2015-11-06
Volume
3
Issue
4
Pages
e102
ISSN
2291-5222 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2116293971
Cited by
268
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 42 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 38 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 1
FWCI
3.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR mhealth and uhealth (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
Keywords
mobile application, schizophrenia, psychosis, mobile health, feasibility, participant retention, app adherence, user engagement, user satisfaction, digital mental health interventions

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