Common Practices for Sociodemographic Data Reporting in Digital Mental Health Intervention Research: A Scoping Review
Kirvin-Quamme, A.; Kissinger, J.; Quinlan, L.; Montgomery, R. M.; Chernenok, M.; Pirner, M.; Pajarito, S.; Rapoport, S.; Wicks, P. M.; Darcy, A.; Green, C. J.; Robinson, A.
Show abstract
BackgroundThe ability for digital mental health interventions (DMHI) to reduce mental health disparities relies on recruitment of research participants with diverse sociodemographic and self-identity characteristics. Despite its importance, sociodemographic reporting in research is often limited, and the state of reporting practices in DMHI research in particular has not been comprehensively reviewed. ObjectivesTo characterize the state of sociodemographic data reported in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of app-based DMHIs published globally from 2007 to 2022. MethodsA scoping review of RCTs of app-based DMHIs examined reporting frequency for 16 sociodemographic domains (i.e., Gender) and common category options within each domain (i.e., woman). The search queried five electronic databases. 5079 records were screened and 299 articles were included. ResultsOn average, studies reported 4.64 (SD = 1.79; range 0 - 9) of 16 sociodemographic domains. The most common were Age (97%) and Education (67%). The least common were Housing Situation (6%), Residency/Location (5%), Veteran Status (4%), Number of Children (3%), Sexual Orientation (2%), Disability Status (2%), and Food Security (<1%). Gender or Sex was reported in 98% of studies: Gender only (51%), Sex only (28%), both (<1%), Gender/Sex reported but unspecified (18%). Race or Ethnicity was reported in 48% of studies: Race only (14%), Ethnicity only (14%), both (10%), Race/Ethnicity reported but unspecified (10%). ConclusionsThis review describes widespread underreporting of sociodemographic information in RCTs of app-based DMHIs published from 2007 to 2022. Reporting was often incomplete (i.e., % female only), unclear (i.e., conflation of Gender/Sex), and limited (i.e., only options representing majority groups were reported). Trends suggest reporting somewhat improved in recent years. Diverse participant populations must be welcomed and described in DMHI research to broaden learnings and generalizability of results; a prerequisite of DMHIs potential to reduce disparities in mental healthcare. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF THIS STUDYO_LIThis study is the first of its kind to assess global sociodemographic reporting practices in RCTs of treatment outcomes research for app-based DMHIs C_LIO_LIThis review was both large and comprehensive, screening over 5000 articles leading to the inclusion of nearly 300 articles spanning the entire lifespan of app-based DMHIs and extracting data for a wide array of 16 sociodemographic domains C_LIO_LIArticle inclusion criteria allowed for a broad range of DMHI studies, including populations with both clinical and sub-clinical conditions C_LIO_LIIt was not feasible to report on the sociodemographic composition of each study sample due to the large number of studies included in the review and the breadth of domains evaluated C_LIO_LIThis review is descriptive, and did not formally assess statistical differences in reporting practices between different sub-groups or time periods, or provide any assessment of barriers, facilitators, or solutions to the issues identified C_LI
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Individual Participant Data Network Meta-analysis of psychosocial interventions for survivors of intimate partner violence: Study protocol 97%
- Psychotherapies and Psychological Support for Individuals Facing Psychological Distress during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Scoping Review 96%
- Factors influencing the effectiveness of nature–based Interventions (NBIs) aimed at improving mental health and wellbeing: Protocol of an umbrella review 96%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Exposure to and engagement with digital psychoeducational content and community related to maternal mental health by perinatal persons and mothers: design of an online survey with optional follow-up and participant characteristics 95%
- The Womens Wellness After Giving Birth Program (WWAGBP) for Vietnamese women: A single-arm trial protocol 94%
- Scientific hypothesis generation process in clinical research: a secondary data analytic tool versus experience study protocol 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Prevalence of mental health illness in Nigeria: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis 95%
- Community mobilisation approaches to preventing and reducing adolescent multiple risk behaviour: a realist review protocol 94%
- Under detection of depression in primary care settings in low and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- A tool to assess risk of bias in studies estimating the prevalence of mental health disorders (RoB-PrevMH) 97%
- Quantifying Care, Qualifying Experiences: A Systematic Review of Measurement-Based Care in Psychiatry from Patient and Provider Perspectives 95%
- Single-session intervention with and without video support to prevent the worsening of emotional distress among healthcare workers during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: a randomized clinical trial 94%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.