Stakeholder perspectives on evidence for digital mental health interventions: Implications for accreditation systems

Batterham, Philip J. and Calear, Alison L. and O'Dea, Bridianne and Larsen, Mark E. and Kavanagh, David J. and Titov, Nickolai and March, Sonja and Hickie, Ian and Teesson, Maree and Dear, Blake F. and Reynolds, Julia and Lowinger, Jocelyn and Thornton, Louise and Gorman, Patrick (2019) Stakeholder perspectives on evidence for digital mental health interventions: Implications for accreditation systems. Digital Health, 5 (Jan-Dec). pp. 1-7.

[img]
Preview
Text (Published Version)
Batterham-2019-Digital-Health-Stakeholder-perspectives.pdf
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial 4.0.

Download (269kB) | Preview

Abstract

Background: Digital mental health interventions can be effective for treating mental health problems, but uptake by consumers and clinicians is not optimal. The lack of an accreditation pathway for digital mental health interventions is a barrier to their uptake among clinicians and consumers. However, there are a number of factors that may contribute to whether a digital intervention is suitable for recommendation to the public. The aim of this study was to identify the types of evidence that would support the accreditation of digital interventions.
Method: An expert workshop was convened, including researcher, clinician, consumer (people with lived experience of a mental health condition) and policymaker representatives.
Results: Existing methods for assessing the evidence for digital mental health interventions were discussed by the stakeholders present at the workshop. Empirical evidence from randomised controlled trials was identified as a key component for evaluating digital interventions. However, information on the safety of users, data security, user ratings, and fidelity to clinical guidelines, along with data from routine care including adherence, engagement and clinical outcomes, were also identified as important considerations when evaluating an intervention. There are considerable challenges in weighing the evidence for a digital mental health intervention.
Conclusions: Empirical evidence should be the cornerstone of any accreditation system to identify appropriate digital mental health interventions. However, robust accreditation systems should also account for program and user safety, user engagement and experience, and fidelity to clinical treatment guidelines.


Statistics for USQ ePrint 37104
Statistics for this ePrint Item
Item Type: Article (Commonwealth Reporting Category C)
Refereed: Yes
Item Status: Live Archive
Faculty/School / Institute/Centre: Current - Faculty of Health, Engineering and Sciences - School of Psychology and Counselling (1 Jan 2015 -)
Faculty/School / Institute/Centre: Current - Faculty of Health, Engineering and Sciences - School of Psychology and Counselling (1 Jan 2015 -)
Date Deposited: 21 Jan 2020 00:46
Last Modified: 29 Jan 2020 01:21
Uncontrolled Keywords: Internet interventions; app; accreditation; dissemination
Fields of Research : 11 Medical and Health Sciences > 1117 Public Health and Health Services > 111712 Health Promotion
17 Psychology and Cognitive Sciences > 1701 Psychology > 170106 Health, Clinical and Counselling Psychology
Identification Number or DOI: 10.1177/2055207619878069
URI: http://eprints.usq.edu.au/id/eprint/37104

Actions (login required)

View Item Archive Repository Staff Only