1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      Submit your digital health research with an established publisher
      - celebrating 25 years of open access

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Digital Mental Health for Schizophrenia and Other Severe Mental Illnesses: An International Consensus on Current Challenges and Potential Solutions

      research-article
      , MD, PhD 1 , 2 , 3 , , , DClinPsy, PhD 4 , 5 , , MSc 6 , , PhD 7 , 8 , 6 , , MD, PhD 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , , DClinPsy 2 , 13 , , PhD 14 , , PhD 15 , 16 , , MD 1 , 2 , 3 , , MD, PhD 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , , MD 1 , 2 , 3 , , MD 17 , 18 , , BS 8 , , MBI, MD 8 , , MD, PhD 1 , 2 , 3
      (Reviewer), (Reviewer), (Reviewer)
      JMIR Mental Health
      JMIR Publications
      digital, mental health, severe mental illness, consensus, lived experience, ethics, user-centered design, patient and public involvement, mobile phone

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Digital approaches may be helpful in augmenting care to address unmet mental health needs, particularly for schizophrenia and severe mental illness (SMI).

          Objective

          An international multidisciplinary group was convened to reach a consensus on the challenges and potential solutions regarding collecting data, delivering treatment, and the ethical challenges in digital mental health approaches for schizophrenia and SMI.

          Methods

          The consensus development panel method was used, with an in-person meeting of 2 groups: the expert group and the panel. Membership was multidisciplinary including those with lived experience, with equal participation at all stages and coproduction of the consensus outputs and summary. Relevant literature was shared in advance of the meeting, and a systematic search of the recent literature on digital mental health interventions for schizophrenia and psychosis was completed to ensure that the panel was informed before the meeting with the expert group.

          Results

          Four broad areas of challenge and proposed solutions were identified: (1) user involvement for real coproduction; (2) new approaches to methodology in digital mental health, including agreed standards, data sharing, measuring harms, prevention strategies, and mechanistic research; (3) regulation and funding issues; and (4) implementation in real-world settings (including multidisciplinary collaboration, training, augmenting existing service provision, and social and population-focused approaches). Examples are provided with more detail on human-centered research design, lived experience perspectives, and biomedical ethics in digital mental health approaches for SMI.

          Conclusions

          The group agreed by consensus on a number of recommendations: (1) a new and improved approach to digital mental health research (with agreed reporting standards, data sharing, and shared protocols), (2) equal emphasis on social and population research as well as biological and psychological approaches, (3) meaningful collaborations across varied disciplines that have previously not worked closely together, (4) increased focus on the business model and product with planning and new funding structures across the whole development pathway, (5) increased focus and reporting on ethical issues and potential harms, and (6) organizational changes to allow for true communication and coproduction with those with lived experience of SMI. This study approach, combining an international expert meeting with patient and public involvement and engagement throughout the process, consensus methodology, discussion, and publication, is a helpful way to identify directions for future research and clinical implementation in rapidly evolving areas and can be combined with measurements of real-world clinical impact over time. Similar initiatives will be helpful in other areas of digital mental health and similarly fast-evolving fields to focus research and organizational change and effect improved real-world clinical implementation.

          Related collections

          Most cited references139

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found

          Multidisciplinary research priorities for the COVID-19 pandemic: a call for action for mental health science

          Summary The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is having a profound effect on all aspects of society, including mental health and physical health. We explore the psychological, social, and neuroscientific effects of COVID-19 and set out the immediate priorities and longer-term strategies for mental health science research. These priorities were informed by surveys of the public and an expert panel convened by the UK Academy of Medical Sciences and the mental health research charity, MQ: Transforming Mental Health, in the first weeks of the pandemic in the UK in March, 2020. We urge UK research funding agencies to work with researchers, people with lived experience, and others to establish a high level coordination group to ensure that these research priorities are addressed, and to allow new ones to be identified over time. The need to maintain high-quality research standards is imperative. International collaboration and a global perspective will be beneficial. An immediate priority is collecting high-quality data on the mental health effects of the COVID-19 pandemic across the whole population and vulnerable groups, and on brain function, cognition, and mental health of patients with COVID-19. There is an urgent need for research to address how mental health consequences for vulnerable groups can be mitigated under pandemic conditions, and on the impact of repeated media consumption and health messaging around COVID-19. Discovery, evaluation, and refinement of mechanistically driven interventions to address the psychological, social, and neuroscientific aspects of the pandemic are required. Rising to this challenge will require integration across disciplines and sectors, and should be done together with people with lived experience. New funding will be required to meet these priorities, and it can be efficiently leveraged by the UK's world-leading infrastructure. This Position Paper provides a strategy that may be both adapted for, and integrated with, research efforts in other countries.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews

            The methods and results of systematic reviews should be reported in sufficient detail to allow users to assess the trustworthiness and applicability of the review findings. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was developed to facilitate transparent and complete reporting of systematic reviews and has been updated (to PRISMA 2020) to reflect recent advances in systematic review methodology and terminology. Here, we present the explanation and elaboration paper for PRISMA 2020, where we explain why reporting of each item is recommended, present bullet points that detail the reporting recommendations, and present examples from published reviews. We hope that changes to the content and structure of PRISMA 2020 will facilitate uptake of the guideline and lead to more transparent, complete, and accurate reporting of systematic reviews.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Age at onset of mental disorders worldwide: large-scale meta-analysis of 192 epidemiological studies

              Promotion of good mental health, prevention, and early intervention before/at the onset of mental disorders improve outcomes. However, the range and peak ages at onset for mental disorders are not fully established. To provide robust, global epidemiological estimates of age at onset for mental disorders, we conducted a PRISMA/MOOSE-compliant systematic review with meta-analysis of birth cohort/cross-sectional/cohort studies, representative of the general population, reporting age at onset for any ICD/DSM-mental disorders, identified in PubMed/Web of Science (up to 16/05/2020) (PROSPERO:CRD42019143015). Co-primary outcomes were the proportion of individuals with onset of mental disorders before age 14, 18, 25, and peak age at onset, for any mental disorder and across International Classification of Diseases 11 diagnostic blocks. Median age at onset of specific disorders was additionally investigated. Across 192 studies (n = 708,561) included, the proportion of individuals with onset of any mental disorders before the ages of 14, 18, 25 were 34.6%, 48.4%, 62.5%, and peak age was 14.5 years (k = 14, median = 18, interquartile range (IQR) = 11–34). For diagnostic blocks, the proportion of individuals with onset of disorder before the age of 14, 18, 25 and peak age were as follows: neurodevelopmental disorders: 61.5%, 83.2%, 95.8%, 5.5 years (k = 21, median=12, IQR = 7–16), anxiety/fear-related disorders: 38.1%, 51.8%, 73.3%, 5.5 years (k = 73, median = 17, IQR = 9–25), obsessive-compulsive/related disorders: 24.6%, 45.1%, 64.0%, 14.5 years (k = 20, median = 19, IQR = 14–29), feeding/eating disorders/problems: 15.8%, 48.1%, 82.4%, 15.5 years (k = 11, median = 18, IQR = 15–23), conditions specifically associated with stress disorders: 16.9%, 27.6%, 43.1%, 15.5 years (k = 16, median = 30, IQR = 17–48), substance use disorders/addictive behaviours: 2.9%, 15.2%, 48.8%, 19.5 years (k = 58, median = 25, IQR = 20–41), schizophrenia-spectrum disorders/primary psychotic states: 3%, 12.3%, 47.8%, 20.5 years (k = 36, median = 25, IQR = 20–34), personality disorders/related traits: 1.9%, 9.6%, 47.7%, 20.5 years (k = 6, median = 25, IQR = 20–33), and mood disorders: 2.5%, 11.5%, 34.5%, 20.5 years (k = 79, median = 31, IQR = 21–46). No significant difference emerged by sex, or definition of age of onset. Median age at onset for specific mental disorders mapped on a time continuum, from phobias/separation anxiety/autism spectrum disorder/attention deficit hyperactivity disorder/social anxiety (8-13 years) to anorexia nervosa/bulimia nervosa/obsessive-compulsive/binge eating/cannabis use disorders (17-22 years), followed by schizophrenia, personality, panic and alcohol use disorders (25-27 years), and finally post-traumatic/depressive/generalized anxiety/bipolar/acute and transient psychotic disorders (30-35 years), with overlap among groups and no significant clustering. These results inform the timing of good mental health promotion/preventive/early intervention, updating the current mental health system structured around a child/adult service schism at age 18.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                JMIR Ment Health
                JMIR Ment Health
                JMH
                JMIR Mental Health
                JMIR Publications (Toronto, Canada )
                2368-7959
                2024
                8 May 2024
                : 11
                : e57155
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Department of Psychiatry University of Oxford Oxford United Kingdom
                [2 ] Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust Warneford Hospital Oxford United Kingdom
                [3 ] Oxford Precision Psychiatry Lab NIHR Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre Oxford United Kingdom
                [4 ] Department of Psychology Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience King’s College London London United Kingdom
                [5 ] South London & Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust London United Kingdom
                [6 ] MQ Mental Health Research London United Kingdom
                [7 ] Participatory eHealth and Health Data Research Group, Department of Women's and Children's Health Uppsala University Uppsala Sweden
                [8 ] Division of Digital Psychiatry Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Harvard Medical School Boston, MA United States
                [9 ] Department of Psychiatry and Psychology Institute of Neuroscience Hospital Clínic de Barcelona Barcelona Spain
                [10 ] Bipolar and Depressive Disorders Unit Digital Innovation Group Institut d’Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS) Barcelona Spain
                [11 ] Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud Mental (CIBERSAM) Instituto de Salud Carlos III Madrid Spain
                [12 ] Department of Medicine School of Medicine and Health Sciences Institute of Neurosciences, University of Barcelona Barcelona Spain
                [13 ] Department of Experimental Psychology University of Oxford Oxford United Kingdom
                [14 ] School of Science and Technology Middlesex University London United Kingdom
                [15 ] Institute of Neuroscience and Psychology University of Glasgow Glasgow United Kingdom
                [16 ] Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin Berlin Germany
                [17 ] Psychiatry Unit Department of Neurosciences and Mental Health Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico Ca’ Granda, Fondazione Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Milan Italy
                [18 ] Department of Pathophysiology and Transplantation University of Milan Milan Italy
                Author notes
                Corresponding Author: Katharine A Smith katharine.smith@ 123456psych.ox.ac.uk
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2679-1472
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6044-6093
                https://orcid.org/0009-0008-3227-5478
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0205-1165
                https://orcid.org/0009-0003-7865-5533
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2693-6849
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9543-8109
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9735-3512
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0892-2224
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8717-0832
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6798-4054
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5883-0638
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7994-3938
                https://orcid.org/0009-0001-4638-9205
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5362-7937
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5179-8321
                Article
                v11i1e57155
                10.2196/57155
                11112473
                38717799
                cadea82c-1157-40e8-8e75-732c6dd6bfe5
                ©Katharine A Smith, Amy Hardy, Anastasia Vinnikova, Charlotte Blease, Lea Milligan, Diego Hidalgo-Mazzei, Sinéad Lambe, Lisa Marzano, Peter J Uhlhaas, Edoardo G Ostinelli, Gerard Anmella, Caroline Zangani, Rosario Aronica, Bridget Dwyer, John Torous, Andrea Cipriani. Originally published in JMIR Mental Health (https://mental.jmir.org), 08.05.2024.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Mental Health, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://mental.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

                History
                : 7 February 2024
                : 23 February 2024
                : 8 March 2024
                : 21 March 2024
                Categories
                Original Paper
                Original Paper

                digital,mental health,severe mental illness,consensus,lived experience,ethics,user-centered design,patient and public involvement,mobile phone

                Comments

                Comment on this article