Domhardt Matthias, Mennel Vera, Angerer Florian, Grund Simon, Mayer Axel, Büscher Rebekka, Sander Lasse B, Cuijpers Pim, Terhorst Yannik, Baumeister Harald
Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Ulm University, Lise-Meitner-Str. 16., 89081, Ulm, Germany.
Department of Quantitative Methods, Universität Hamburg, von-Melle-Park 5, 20146, Hamburg, Germany.
Behav Res Ther. 2025 Jun;189:104735. doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2025.104735. Epub 2025 Apr 3.
The efficacy of digital interventions for depression has been established. In contrast, only limited knowledge on their change processes is currently available, and precise effect size estimates for mediators are pending. This study aimed to systematically review mediation studies and meta-analytically evaluate indirect effects of cognitive and behavioral mediators in digital interventions for adults with depression. The databases CENTRAL, Embase, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO were systematically searched for eligible randomized controlled trials. Two independent reviewers extracted the data, assigned mediators to eight categories and evaluated the methodological quality of included studies. Two-stage structural equation modeling was applied to synthesize indirect effects for cognitive and behavioral mediators. Overall, 25 studies (8110 participants) were eligible, which investigated 31 cognitive, 29 behavioral and 24 other mediators. Meta-analyses yielded significant indirect effects for combined cognitive mediators (ab = -0.068; 95 %-CI: [-0.093, -0.047]; k = 14 studies) and combined behavioral mediators (ab = -0.037; 95 %-CI: [-0.048, -0.028]; k = 13), but not for the specific cognitive mediators interpretation bias and dysfunctional attitudes. The systematic review revealed that all studies fulfilled at least five out of nine methodological quality criteria for psychotherapy process research, but the risk of bias assessment raised some concerns, particularly in regard to potential deviations from intended interventions. Overall, the findings of this meta-analytic review contribute to the understanding of the mechanisms of change in digital interventions for depression, and can inform the evidence-based advancement of future interventions.
数字干预对抑郁症的疗效已得到证实。相比之下,目前关于其变化过程的知识有限,对中介因素的确切效应量估计仍未得出。本研究旨在系统回顾中介作用研究,并对数字干预对成年抑郁症患者认知和行为中介因素的间接效应进行元分析评估。系统检索CENTRAL、Embase、MEDLINE和PsycINFO数据库,查找符合条件的随机对照试验。两名独立评审员提取数据,将中介因素分为八类,并评估纳入研究的方法学质量。应用两阶段结构方程模型综合认知和行为中介因素的间接效应。总体而言,25项研究(8110名参与者)符合条件,这些研究调查了31种认知、29种行为和24种其他中介因素。元分析得出联合认知中介因素有显著间接效应(ab = -0.068;95%置信区间:[-0.093, -0.047];k = 14项研究),联合行为中介因素也有显著间接效应(ab = -0.037;95%置信区间:[-0.048, -0.028];k = 13项研究),但特定认知中介因素解释偏差和功能失调态度没有显著间接效应。系统评价显示,所有研究均至少满足心理治疗过程研究九项方法学质量标准中的五项,但偏倚风险评估引发了一些担忧,特别是在可能偏离预期干预措施方面。总体而言,这项元分析综述的结果有助于理解数字干预对抑郁症的变化机制,并可为未来干预措施的循证推进提供参考。