MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406530216 · doi:10.2196/69294

Does the Digital Therapeutic Alliance Exist? Integrative Review

2025· review· en· W4406530216 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Amylie Malouin-Lachance, Julien Capolupo, Chloé Laplante, Alexandre Hudon

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Mental Health · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalInstitut universitaire en santé mentale de MontréalInstitut Universitaire en Santé Mentale de QuébecInstitut national de psychiatrie légale Philippe-PinelUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintAllianceIntegrative medicinePsychologyMedicineComputer scienceAlternative medicineWorld Wide WebPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Mental health disorders significantly impact global populations, prompting the rise of digital mental health interventions, such as artificial intelligence (AI)-powered chatbots, to address gaps in access to care. This review explores the potential for a "digital therapeutic alliance (DTA)," emphasizing empathy, engagement, and alignment with traditional therapeutic principles to enhance user outcomes. Objective: The primary objective of this review was to identify key concepts underlying the DTA in AI-driven psychotherapeutic interventions for mental health. The secondary objective was to propose an initial definition of the DTA based on these identified concepts. Methods: The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) for scoping reviews and Tavares de Souza's integrative review methodology were followed, encompassing systematic literature searches in Medline, Web of Science, PsycNet, and Google Scholar. Data from eligible studies were extracted and analyzed using Horvath et al's conceptual framework on a therapeutic alliance, focusing on goal alignment, task agreement, and the therapeutic bond, with quality assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Results: A total of 28 studies were identified from an initial pool of 1294 articles after excluding duplicates and ineligible studies. These studies informed the development of a conceptual framework for a DTA, encompassing key elements such as goal alignment, task agreement, therapeutic bond, user engagement, and the facilitators and barriers affecting therapeutic outcomes. The interventions primarily focused on AI-powered chatbots, digital psychotherapy, and other digital tools. Conclusions: The findings of this integrative review provide a foundational framework for the concept of a DTA and report its potential to replicate key therapeutic mechanisms such as empathy, trust, and collaboration in AI-driven psychotherapeutic tools. While the DTA shows promise in enhancing accessibility and engagement in mental health care, further research and innovation are needed to address challenges such as personalization, ethical concerns, and long-term impact.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.821
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.509
Teacher spread0.427 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations65
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Mental HealthSame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207