TY - JOUR
T1 - A systematic review of predictors and moderators of treatment outcomes in internet- and mobile-based interventions for depression
AU - Sextl-Plötz, Theresa
AU - Steinhoff, Maria
AU - Baumeister, Harald
AU - Cuijpers, Pim
AU - Ebert, David D.
AU - Zarski, Anna Carlotta
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 The Authors
PY - 2024/9
Y1 - 2024/9
N2 - This systematic review aimed to synthesize evidence on predictors and moderators of treatment outcomes in internet- and mobile-based interventions (IMIs) for depression, informing personalized care. A systematic search across PubMed, PsycInfo, and Cochrane yielded 33,002 results. Two reviewers independently performed screening, data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and methodological quality evaluation. Fifty-eight single studies (m = 466 analyses) focusing on baseline-predictors (59.7 %, m = 278), process-predictors (16.5 %, m = 77), and moderators (21.9 %, m = 102), and six individual patient data meta-analyses (m = 93) were included. Only 24.0 % (m = 112/466) of analyses in single studies and 15.1 % (m = 14/93) in individual patient data meta-analyses were significant. Evidence from single studies was rated as insufficient for all variable categories with only 2 out of 40 categories showing >50 % significant results. Baseline depression severity had the strongest predictive value with higher scores linked to better outcomes followed by variables indicative for the course-of-change. Other frequently analyzed and potentially relevant variables with significant results were adherence, age, educational level, ethnicity, relationship status, treatment history, and behavioral variables. More high quality quantitative studies with sufficient power are essential to validate and expand findings, identifying predictors and moderators specifically relevant in IMIs to explain differential treatment effects.
AB - This systematic review aimed to synthesize evidence on predictors and moderators of treatment outcomes in internet- and mobile-based interventions (IMIs) for depression, informing personalized care. A systematic search across PubMed, PsycInfo, and Cochrane yielded 33,002 results. Two reviewers independently performed screening, data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and methodological quality evaluation. Fifty-eight single studies (m = 466 analyses) focusing on baseline-predictors (59.7 %, m = 278), process-predictors (16.5 %, m = 77), and moderators (21.9 %, m = 102), and six individual patient data meta-analyses (m = 93) were included. Only 24.0 % (m = 112/466) of analyses in single studies and 15.1 % (m = 14/93) in individual patient data meta-analyses were significant. Evidence from single studies was rated as insufficient for all variable categories with only 2 out of 40 categories showing >50 % significant results. Baseline depression severity had the strongest predictive value with higher scores linked to better outcomes followed by variables indicative for the course-of-change. Other frequently analyzed and potentially relevant variables with significant results were adherence, age, educational level, ethnicity, relationship status, treatment history, and behavioral variables. More high quality quantitative studies with sufficient power are essential to validate and expand findings, identifying predictors and moderators specifically relevant in IMIs to explain differential treatment effects.
KW - Depression
KW - Internet- and mobile-based intervention
KW - Moderator
KW - Predictor
KW - Systematic review
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85199131435&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.invent.2024.100760
DO - 10.1016/j.invent.2024.100760
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85199131435
SN - 2214-7829
VL - 37
JO - Internet Interventions
JF - Internet Interventions
M1 - 100760
ER -