Accepted for/Published in: Journal of Medical Internet Research
Date Submitted: Jan 23, 2021
Date Accepted: Nov 8, 2021
Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.
A comparison of mobile health platforms developed for depression and anxiety available for research or commercial purposes: A systematic review of the literature and app store review
ABSTRACT
Background:
Mobile health (mHealth) platforms show promise in the management of mental health conditions such as anxiety and depression. This has resulted in an abundance of mHealth platforms available for research or commercial use.
Objective:
This study aimed to characterize the current state of mHealth platforms designed for anxiety and/or depression that are available for research, commercial use or both.
Methods:
A systematic review was conducted using a two-pronged approach. (i) A systematic literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO was conducted to identify platforms available for research purposes. (ii) A simultaneous search of two major mobile app stores – Apple App Store and Google Play Store – to identify commercially available platforms. Key characteristics of the mHealth platforms such as platform name, targeted condition, targeted group, purpose, technology type, intervention type, commercial availability, regulatory information were synthesized.
Results:
The literature and app stores searches yielded 169 and 179 mHealth platforms respectively. Most platforms developed for research purposes were designed for depression (n=113) whereas the app stores search reported a higher number of platforms were developed for anxiety (n=58 and n=27 for Android and iOS operating systems, respectively). The most common purpose of platforms in both searches was treatment (n=122 and n=129 for the literature and app stores searches, respectively). In regard to the types of intervention, cognitive behavioral therapy and referral to care/counselling emerged as the most popular options offered by the platforms identified in the literature and app stores searches, respectively. Most platforms from both searches did not have a specific target age group. Additionally, most platforms found in the app stores lacked clinical and real-world evidence, while only small number of platforms found in published research were available commercially.
Conclusions:
A considerable number of mHealth platforms designed for anxiety and/or depression are available for research, commercial use or both. Characteristics of these mHealth platforms vary greatly. Future effort should focus on accessing the quality – utility, safety and effectiveness – of the existing platforms and providing developers, from both commercial and research sectors alike, a reporting guideline for their platform description as well as a regulatory framework to facilitate the development, validation and deployment of effective mHealth platforms. Clinical Trial: CRD42020193956
Citation
Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.