Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Region Hovedstaden - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital

Methodological Challenges in Randomized Controlled Trials on Smartphone-Based Treatment in Psychiatry: Systematic Review

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftReviewForskningpeer review


  1. S100B and brain derived neurotrophic factor in monozygotic twins with, at risk of and without affective disorders

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  2. Automatically generated smartphone data and subjective stress in healthy individuals - a pilot study

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  3. Association between Mental Disorders and Subsequent Medical Conditions

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  4. Forecasting Mood in Bipolar Disorder From Smartphone Self-assessments: Hierarchical Bayesian Approach

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Vis graf over relationer

BACKGROUND: Smartphone-based technology is developing at high speed, and many apps offer potential new ways of monitoring and treating a range of psychiatric disorders and symptoms. However, the effects of most available apps have not been scientifically investigated. Within medicine, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the standard method for providing the evidence of effects. However, their rigidity and long time frame may contrast with the field of information technology research. Therefore, a systematic review of methodological challenges in designing and conducting RCTs within mobile health is needed.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to (1) identify and describe RCTs investigating the effect of smartphone-based treatment in adult patients with a psychiatric diagnosis, (2) discuss methodological challenges in designing and conducting individual trials, and (3) suggest recommendations for future trials.

METHODS: A systematic search in English was conducted in PubMed, PsycINFO, and EMBASE up to August 12, 2019. The search terms were (1) psychiatric disorders in broad term and for specific disorders AND (2) smartphone or app AND (3) RCT. The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials electronic health guidelines were used as a template for data extraction. The focus was on trial design, method, and reporting. Only trials having sufficient information on diagnosis and acceptable diagnostic procedures, having a smartphone as a central part of treatment, and using an RCT design were included.

RESULTS: A total of 27 trials comprising 3312 patients within a range of psychiatric diagnoses were included. Among them, 2 trials were concerning drug or alcohol abuse, 3 psychosis, 10 affective disorders, 9 anxiety and posttraumatic stress disorder, 1 eating disorder, and 1 attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. In addition, 1 trial used a cross-diagnostic design, 7 trials included patients with a clinical diagnosis that was subsequently assessed and validated by the researchers, and 11 trials had a sample size above 100. Generally, large between-trial heterogeneity and multiple approaches to patient recruitment, diagnostic procedures, trial design, comparator, outcome measures, and analyses were identified. Only 5 trials published a trial protocol. Furthermore, 1 trial provided information regarding technological updates, and only 18 trials reported on the conflicts of interest. No trial addressed the ethical aspects of using smartphones in treatment.

CONCLUSIONS: This first systematic review of the methodological challenges in designing and conducting RCTs investigating smartphone-based treatment in psychiatric patients suggests an increasing number of trials but with a lower quality compared with classic medical RCTs. Heterogeneity and methodological issues in individual trials limit the evidence. Methodological recommendations are presented.

TidsskriftJournal of Medical Internet Research
Udgave nummer10
Sider (fra-til)e15362
StatusUdgivet - 27 okt. 2019

Bibliografisk note

©Morten Lindbjerg Tønning, Lars Vedel Kessing, Jakob Eivind Bardram, Maria Faurholt-Jepsen. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (, 27.10.2019.

ID: 58439206