Correction: Digital Psychotherapies for Adults Experiencing Depressive Symptoms: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (Preprint)

• DOI: 10.2196/preprints.67439
• Publication Date: 2024-10-17T15:45:36Z
• Authors: Joanna Omylinska-...; Supritha Aithal; Shaun Liverpool; Rebecca Clark; Zoe Moula; January Wood; Laura Viliardos; Edgar Rodríguez-D...; Fleur Farish-Edwards; Ailsa Parsons; Mia Eisenstadt; Marcus Bull; Linda Dubrow-Mars...; Scott Thurston; Vicky Karkou
• Keywords: Preprint

<sec> <title>UNSTRUCTURED</title> Depression affects 5% of adults and it is a major cause disability worldwide. Digital psychotherapies offer an accessible solution addressing this issue. This systematic review examines spectrum digital for depression, considering both their effectiveness user perspectives. focuses on identifying (1) the most common types psychotherapies, (2) clients’ practitioners’ perspectives helpful unhelpful aspects, (3) with depression. A mixed methods protocol was developed using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items Systematic Reviews Meta-Analyses) guidelines. The search strategy used Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, Study Design (PICOS) framework covering 2010 to 2024 7 databases were searched. Overall, 13 authors extracted data, all aspects checked by &amp;gt;1 reviewer minimize biases. Quality appraisal conducted studies. therapists’ perceptions factors identified qualitative narrative synthesis. Meta-analyses depression outcomes standardized mean difference (calculated as Hedges g) postintervention change between psychotherapy control groups. Of 3303 initial records, 186 records (5.63%; 160 studies) included in review. Quantitative studies (131/160, 81.8%) randomized controlled trial design (88/160, 55%) common. overall sample size 70,720 participants (female: n=51,677, 73.07%; male: n=16,779, 23.73%). interventions “stand-alone” or non–human contact (58/160, 36.2%), “human contact” (11/160, 6.8%), “blended” including stand-alone human (91/160, 56.8%). What clients practitioners perceived support motivation accessibility, explanation task reminders, resources, learning skills manage symptoms. problems usability lack direction explanation. total 80 16,072 meta-analysis, revealing moderate large effect favor (Hedges g=–0.61, 95% CI –0.75 –0.47; Z=–8.58; P&amp;lt;.001). Subgroup analyses different intervention delivery formats session frequency did not have statistically significant results (P=.48 P=.97, respectively). However, blended approaches revealed g=–0.793), while involving g=–0.42) no g=–0.40) had slightly smaller sizes. found be effective regardless format frequency. Blended larger than those contact. especially diverse ethnic groups young women. Future research should focus understanding sources heterogeneity based population characteristics. PROSPERO CRD42021238462; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=238462 </sec>