Suppr超能文献

理解围产期女性参与数字心理健康和幸福计划:系统评价而不进行荟萃分析。

Understanding Engagement in Digital Mental Health and Well-being Programs for Women in the Perinatal Period: Systematic Review Without Meta-analysis.

机构信息

Telethon Kids Institute, Nedlands, Australia.

School of Medicine, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.

出版信息

J Med Internet Res. 2022 Aug 9;24(8):e36620. doi: 10.2196/36620.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Pregnancy and the postnatal period can be a time of increased psychological distress, which can be detrimental to both the mother and the developing child. Digital interventions are cost-effective and accessible tools to support positive mental health in women during the perinatal period. Although studies report efficacy, a key concern regarding web-based interventions is the lack of engagement leading to drop out, lack of participation, or reduced potential intervention benefits.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aimed to understand the reporting and levels of engagement in studies of digital psychological mental health or well-being interventions administered during the perinatal period. Specific objectives were to understand how studies report engagement across 4 domains specified in the Connect, Attend, Participate, and Enact (CAPE) model, make recommendations on best practices to report engagement in digital mental health interventions (DMHIs), and understand levels of engagement in intervention studies in this area. To maximize the utility of this systematic review, we intended to develop practical tools for public health use: to develop a logic model to reference the theory of change, evaluate the studies using the CAPE framework, and develop a guide for future data collection to enable consistent reporting in digital interventions.

METHODS

This systematic review used the Cochrane Synthesis Without Meta-analysis reporting guidelines. This study aimed to identify studies reporting DMHIs delivered during the perinatal period in women with subclinical mood symptoms. A systematic database search was used to identify relevant papers using the Ovid Platform for MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Medical Subject Headings on Demand for all English-language articles published in the past 10 years.

RESULTS

Searches generated a database of 3473 potentially eligible studies, with a final selection of 16 (0.46%) studies grouped by study design. Participant engagement was evaluated using the CAPE framework and comparable variables were described. All studies reported at least one engagement metric. However, the measures used were inconsistent, which may have contributed to the wide-ranging results. There was insufficient reporting for enactment (ie, participants' real-world use of intervention skills), with only 38% (6/16) of studies clearly recording longer-term practice through postintervention interviews. The logic model proposes ways of conceptualizing and reporting engagement details in DMHIs more consistently in the future.

CONCLUSIONS

The perinatal period is the optimal time to intervene with strength-based digital tools to build positive mental health. Despite the growing number of studies on digital interventions, few robustly explore engagement, and there is limited evidence of long-term skill use beyond the intervention period. Our results indicate variability in the reporting of both short- and long-term participant engagement behaviors, and we recommend the adoption of standardized reporting metrics in future digital interventions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42020162283; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=162283.

摘要

背景

怀孕和产后阶段可能是心理困扰加剧的时期,这对母亲和发育中的孩子都不利。数字干预是一种具有成本效益且易于获取的工具,可以在围产期支持女性的心理健康。尽管研究报告了疗效,但网络干预的一个关键问题是缺乏参与,导致退出、参与度低或潜在干预效益降低。

目的

本系统评价旨在了解围产期期间进行的数字心理心理健康或幸福感干预研究的报告和参与程度。具体目标是了解如何在连接、关注、参与和实施(CAPE)模型中指定的 4 个领域报告参与情况,就数字心理健康干预(DMHI)的参与报告提出最佳实践建议,并了解该领域干预研究中的参与水平。为了最大限度地利用本系统评价,我们打算开发公共卫生使用的实用工具:制定一个逻辑模型来参考变革理论,使用 CAPE 框架评估研究,并制定一个指南用于未来的数据收集,以实现数字干预的一致报告。

方法

本系统评价使用 Cochrane 无荟萃分析综合报告准则。本研究旨在确定在围产期有亚临床情绪症状的女性中进行的 DMHI 研究报告。使用 Ovid 平台上的 MEDLINE、PsycINFO、EMBASE、Scopus、Web of Science 和按需医学主题词对过去 10 年发表的所有英文文章进行了系统数据库搜索,以确定相关论文。

结果

搜索生成了一个包含 3473 项潜在合格研究的数据库,最终选择了 16 项(0.46%)研究,按研究设计分组。使用 CAPE 框架评估参与者的参与度,并描述了可比变量。所有研究都报告了至少一个参与度指标。然而,使用的措施不一致,这可能导致结果差异很大。实施情况的报告不足(即,参与者对干预技能的实际应用),只有 38%(6/16)的研究通过干预后访谈清楚地记录了更长时间的实践。逻辑模型提出了在未来更一致地报告 DMHI 中参与度细节的方法。

结论

围产期是用基于优势的数字工具干预以建立积极心理健康的最佳时机。尽管关于数字干预的研究越来越多,但很少有研究真正探索参与度,并且几乎没有证据表明干预期后长期技能使用情况。我们的结果表明,短期和长期参与者参与行为的报告存在差异,我们建议在未来的数字干预中采用标准化报告指标。

试验注册

PROSPERO CRD42020162283;https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=162283。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/821b/9399849/278b47737bfc/jmir_v24i8e36620_fig1.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验