JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

Many individuals seeking support for mental health difficulties face challenges identifying appropriate services and navigating complex systems of care. In response, a growing range of digital guidance tools have emerged to support service discovery, navigation, triage and referral. However, the landscape of these technologies remains poorly characterised, and distinctions between signposting, navigation, triage and referral tools are often unclear.

Objective:

To identify, classify and map publicly available digital guidance tools designed to support navigation of mental health services and resources, and to examine how these tools are positioned within mental health care pathways.

Methods:

An environmental scan of publicly available digital guidance tools was conducted using a structured search and screening process informed by established scoping review methodology. Eligible tools were required to provide guidance, navigation, signposting, triage, referral or decision-support functions related to mental health support. Two reviewers independently screened identified tools and extracted data on provider characteristics, functionality, personalisation, human involvement and pathway positioning. Data were synthesised descriptively and conceptually.

Results:

A total of 149 digital guidance tools were identified. Most tools were delivered by NHS organisations (44.3%, n = 66), government or local authority providers (26.2%, n = 39), or charities and non-profit organisations (16.8%, n = 25). Signposting was the most common functionality (92.6%, n = 138), followed by crisis escalation (59.1%, n = 88), referral guidance (53.7%, n = 80) and service directories (53.0%, n = 79). Functions involving greater levels of assessment or personalisation were less common, including service matching (38.9%, n = 58), triage (37.6%, n = 56), needs assessment (34.9%, n = 52) and symptom screening (16.8%, n = 25). Stepped-care guidance was rare (1.3%, n = 2). Personalisation varied across tools, with 36.9% (n = 55) providing no clear personalisation, 35.6% (n = 53) incorporating needs-based personalisation, 18.1% (n = 27) using location-based approaches and 7.4% (n = 11) employing multi-factor personalisation. Most tools operated as fully self-guided resources (69.8%, n = 104), while 21.5% (n = 32) incorporated direct human support and 5.4% (n = 8) used hybrid models. Mapping these functions onto stages of the mental health care pathway showed that tools were more likely to support awareness, service discovery, referral and crisis escalation than to support identification of need or selection between care options, with most tools (65.1%, n = 97) spanning four or more pathway stages.

Conclusions:

The UK digital mental health guidance landscape is extensive and predominantly delivered through public-sector and third-sector organisations. Most tools focus on helping users find and reach services, with relatively few supporting identification of need, service selection or sophisticated personalised navigation. The findings suggest that digital guidance tools currently function primarily as access and navigation resources rather than integrated pathway-management systems. These findings further suggest that evidence-based pathway guidance underpinning mental health care is rarely operationalised within publicly available digital navigation tools, highlighting a potential gap in evidence translation. Clinical Trial: Not applicable