Can depression and anxiety apps improve quality of life, wellbeing, and disability outcomes? Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Cleo Anderson, Jake Linardon
✦ AI-curated · Sources linked
In 30 seconds
This meta-analysis of 25 randomized controlled trials assessed whether mental health apps for depression and anxiety improve quality of life, general wellbeing, and disability. Most trials focused on depression. Compared with controls, apps produced small, significant post-test benefits across all three outcomes: quality of life (g = 0.18; 95% CI = 0.07, 0.28), general wellbeing (g = 0.34; 95% CI = 0.18, 0.50), and disability (g = 0.20; 95% CI = 0.03, 0.37). At follow-up, wellbeing benefits remained significant, whereas the quality-of-life effect was no longer significant.
Key findings
- Post-test quality of life favored apps over controls (n = 17; g = 0.18; 95% CI = 0.07, 0.28; I 2 = 43%).
- Post-test general wellbeing favored apps (n = 14; g = 0.34; 95% CI = 0.18, 0.50; I 2 = 63%).
- Post-test disability favored apps (n = 3; g = 0.20; 95% CI = 0.03, 0.37; I 2 = 46%).
- At follow-up, wellbeing remained improved (n = 10; g = 0.57; 95% CI = 0.39, 0.74; I 2 = 56%), while quality of life was not significantly improved (n = 7; g = 0.08; 95% CI = -0.08, 0.25; I 2 = 65%).
Why it matters
Symptom change does not capture all outcomes relevant to recovery. These pooled findings suggest apps may also offer modest short-term gains in quality of life, wellbeing, and disability, with wellbeing benefits evident at follow-up. The results broaden the evidence clinicians can consider when discussing app-based support, while the predominance of depression-focused trials limits how broadly the findings apply.
What to keep in mind
Most trials targeted depression, and the disability estimate came from only three trials. Follow-up findings differed by outcome, with no significant quality-of-life effect.