Cited by 242Digital Mental Health InterventionsEthics and Social Impacts of AINeuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations

Digital Mental Health for Young People: A Scoping Review of Ethical Promises and Challenges

Open access
Wies, Blanche, Landers, Constantin, Ienca, Marcello·2021·Frontiers in Digital Health

Abstract

Mental health disorders are complex disorders of the nervous system characterized by a behavioral or mental pattern that causes significant distress or impairment of personal functioning. Mental illness is of particular concern for younger people. The WHO estimates that around 20% of the world's children and adolescents have a mental health condition, a rate that is almost double compared to the general population. One approach toward mitigating the medical and socio-economic effects of mental health disorders is leveraging the power of digital health technology to deploy assistive, preventative, and therapeutic solutions for people in need. We define “digital mental health” as any application of digital health technology for mental health assessment, support, prevention, and treatment. However, there is only limited evidence that digital mental health tools can be successfully implemented in clinical settings. Authors have pointed to a lack of technical and medical standards for digital mental health apps, personalized neurotechnology, and assistive cognitive technology as a possible cause of suboptimal adoption and implementation in the clinical setting. Further, ethical concerns have been raised related to insufficient effectiveness, lack of adequate clinical validation, and user-centered design as well as data privacy vulnerabilities of current digital mental health products. The aim of this paper is to report on a scoping review we conducted to capture and synthesize the growing literature on the promises and ethical challenges of digital mental health for young people aged 0–25. This review seeks to survey the scope and focus of the relevant literature, identify major benefits and opportunities of ethical significance (e.g., reducing suffering and improving well-being), and provide a comprehensive mapping of the emerging ethical challenges. Our findings provide a comprehensive synthesis of the current literature and offer a detailed informative basis for any stakeholder involved in the development, deployment, and management of ethically-aligned digital mental health solutions for young people.

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 · 10.3389/fdgth.2021.697072

Cites

57 of 57 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?

  • Patients' mistrust in data sharing due to privacy concerns and confidentiality breaches may reduce their acceptability of digital health technologies.

    “Patients' mistrust in data sharing due to privacy concerns and confidentiality breaches may reduce their acceptability of digital health technologies.”

    From Digital health technologies and major depressive disorder (2023) · cites this paper as [146]

  • Digital health technologies are not equally available to all social groups due to economic, geographical, social, or cultural inequalities.

    “Digital health technologies are not equally available to all social groups due to economic, geographical, social, or cultural inequalities.”

    From Digital health technologies and major depressive disorder (2023) · cites this paper as [146]

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. [60]Ienca M Vayena E. Cambridge analytica and online manipulation. Sci Am. (2018) 30: 384– 91.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wies, B., Landers, C., & Ienca, M.
Affiliations
ETH Zurich (CH)
Corresponding author
Ienca, Marcello
Venue
Frontiers in Digital Health
Published
2021-09-06
Volume
3
Pages
697072-697072
ISSN
2673-253X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3198532692
Cited by
242
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 50 · 2025: 80 · 2024: 65 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 1
FWCI
4.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Digital Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Repository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • ETH Zürich Research Collection
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung (407740_187356/1, NRP77, 187356, 407740, 40158)
  • Innosuisse - Schweizerische Agentur für Innovationsförderung
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations
Keywords
digital mental health, youth mental health, adolescents, ethical considerations, data privacy, clinical validation, user-centered design, mental health apps, neurotechnology, mental illness

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