MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390117630 · doi:10.2196/50787

Effectiveness of Telecare Interventions on Depression Symptoms Among Older Adults: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2023· review· en· W4390117630 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Man Wu, Chaoyang Li, Ting Hu, Xueyang Zhao, Guiyuan Qiao, Xiaolian Gao, Xinhong Zhu, Fen Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Hubei Province
KeywordsMeta-analysisTelecarePsychological interventionDepression (economics)PsychologySystematic reviewMedicineTelehealthmHealthTelemedicinePsychiatryMEDLINEClinical psychologyGerontologyHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Depression is the most common psychiatric disorder among older adults. Despite the effectiveness of pharmacological and psychological therapies, many patients with late-life depression (LLD) are unable to access timely treatment. Telecare has been shown to be effective in addressing patients' psychosocial issues, while its effectiveness in serving patients with LLD remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of telecare in reducing depression and anxiety symptoms and improving quality of life (QoL) in patients with LLD. METHODS: Databases including the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, and EBSCO were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effectiveness of telecare for LLD from database establishment to December 28, 2022. RESULTS: A total of 12 RCTs involving 1663 participants were identified in this study. The meta-analysis showed that (1) telecare significantly reduced depressive symptoms in patients with LLD compared to those in usual care (UC; standardized mean difference [SMD]=-0.46, 95% CI -0.53 to -0.38; P<.001), with the best improvement observed within 3 months of intervention (SMD=-0.72, 95% CI -1.16 to -0.28; P<.001); (2) other scales appeared more effective than the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 for LLD in telecare interventions (SMD=-0.65, 95% CI -0.96 to -0.35; P<.001); (3) telecare was more effective than telephone-based interventions for remote monitoring of LLD (SMD=-1.13, 95% CI -1.51 to -0.76; P<.001); (4) the reduction of depressive symptoms was more pronounced in patients with LLD with chronic conditions (SMD=-0.67, 95% CI -0.89 to -0.44; P<.001); (5) telecare was more effective for LLD in Europe and the Americas than in other regions (SMD=-0.73, 95% CI -0.99 to -0.47; P<.001); (6) telecare significantly reduced anxiety symptoms in patients with LLD (SMD=-0.53, 95% CI -0.73 to -0.33; P=.02); and (7) there was no significant improvement in the psychological components of QoL in patients with LLD compared to those receiving UC (SMD=0.30, 95% CI 0.18-0.43; P=.80). CONCLUSIONS: Telecare is a promising modality of care for treatment, which can alleviate depression and anxiety symptoms in patients with LLD. Continued in-depth research into the effectiveness of telecare in treating depression could better identify where older patients would benefit from this intervention.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.027
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.150
GPT teacher head0.512
Teacher spread0.362 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207