Design of Digital Mental Health Platforms for Family Member Cocompletion: Scoping Review

• Main Authors: Ellen T Welsh (Author), Jennifer E McIntosh (Author), An Vuong (Author), Zoe C G Cloud (Author), Eliza Hartley (Author), James H Boyd (Author)
• Format: Book
• Published: JMIR Publications, 2024-07-01T00:00:00Z.
• Subjects: article
• Online Access: Connect to this object online.
• Notes: 1438-8871; 10.2196/49431
• Keywords: Computer applications to medicine. Medical informatics; R858-859.7; Public aspects of medicine; RA1-1270
• Source: Journal of Medical Internet Research, Vol 26, p e49431 (2024)

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic placed an additional mental health burden on individuals and families, resulting in widespread service access problems. Digital mental health interventions suggest promise for improved accessibility. Recent reviews have shown emerging evidence for individual use and early evidence for multiusers. However, attrition rates remain high for digital mental health interventions, and additional complexities exist when engaging multiple family members together. ObjectiveAs such, this scoping review aims to detail the reported evidence for digital mental health interventions designed for family use with a focus on the build and design characteristics that promote accessibility and engagement and enable cocompletion by families. MethodsA systematic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and CINAHL databases was conducted for articles published in the English language from January 2002 to March 2024. Eligible records included empirical studies of digital platforms containing some elements designed for cocompletion by related people as well as some components intended to be completed without therapist engagement. Platforms were included in cases in which clinical evidence had been documented. ResultsOf the 9527 papers reviewed, 85 (0.89%) met the eligibility criteria. A total of 24 unique platforms designed for co-use by related parties were identified. Relationships between participants included couples, parent-child dyads, family caregiver-care recipient dyads, and families. Common platform features included the delivery of content via structured interventions with no to minimal tailoring or personalization offered. Some interventions provided live contact with therapists. User engagement indicators and findings varied and included user experience, satisfaction, completion rates, and feasibility. Our findings are more remarkable for what was absent in the literature than what was present. Contrary to expectations, few studies reported any design and build characteristics that enabled coparticipation. No studies reported on platform features for enabling cocompletion or considerations for ensuring individual privacy and safety. None examined platform build or design characteristics as moderators of intervention effect, and none offered a formative evaluation of the platform itself. ConclusionsIn this early era of digital mental health platform design, this novel review demonstrates a striking absence of information about design elements associated with the successful engagement of multiple related users in any aspect of a therapeutic process. There remains a large gap in the literature detailing and evaluating platform design, highlighting a significant opportunity for future cross-disciplinary research. This review details the incentive for undertaking such research; suggests design considerations when building digital mental health platforms for use by families; and offers recommendations for future development, including platform co-design and formative evaluation.