The growing field of digital psychiatry: current evidence and the future of apps, social media, chatbots, and virtual reality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the COVID-19 pandemic has largely increased the utilization of telehealth, mobile mental health technologies - such as smartphone apps, vir-tual reality, chatbots, and social media - have also gained attention. These digital health technologies offer the potential of accessible and scalable interventions that can augment traditional care. In this paper, we provide a comprehensive update on the overall field of digital psychiatry, covering three areas. First, we outline the relevance of recent technological advances to mental health research and care, by detailing how smartphones, social media, artificial intelligence and virtual reality present new opportunities for "digital phenotyping" and remote intervention. Second, we review the current evidence for the use of these new technological approaches across different mental health contexts, covering their emerging efficacy in self-management of psychological well-being and early intervention, along with more nascent research supporting their use in clinical management of long-term psychiatric conditions - including major depression; anxiety, bipolar and psychotic disorders; and eating and substance use disorders - as well as in child and adolescent mental health care. Third, we discuss the most pressing challenges and opportunities towards real-world implementation, using the Integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) framework to explain how the innovations themselves, the recipients of these innovations, and the context surrounding innovations all must be considered to facilitate their adoption and use in mental health care systems. We conclude that the new technological capabilities of smartphones, artificial intelligence, social media and virtual reality are already changing mental health care in unforeseen and exciting ways, each accompanied by an early but promising evidence base. We point out that further efforts towards strengthening implementation are needed, and detail the key issues at the patient, provider and policy levels which must now be addressed for digital health technologies to truly improve mental health research and treatment in the future.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.021 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".