Digital Mental Health Interventions for Adolescents in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Scoping Review.

backgroundDigital mental health interventions (DMHIs) are increasingly recognized as potential solutions for adolescent mental health, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals and universal health coverage are instrumental tools for achieving mental health for all. Within this context, understanding the design, evaluation, as well as the barriers and facilitators impacting adolescent engagement with mental health care through DMHIs is essential.

objectiveThis scoping review aims to provide insights into the current landscape of DMHIs for adolescents in LMICs.

methodsThe Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review methodology was used, following the recommendations of the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews). Our search strategy incorporated 3 key concepts: population "adolescents," concept "digital mental health interventions," and context "LMICs." We adapted this strategy for various databases, including ACM Digital Library, APA PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar (including gray literature), IEEE Xplore, ProQuest, PubMed (NLM), ScienceDirect, Scopus, and Web of Science. The articles were screened against a specific eligibility criterion from January 2019 to March 2024.

resultsWe analyzed 20 papers focusing on DMHIs for various mental health conditions among adolescents, such as depression, well-being, anxiety, stigma, self-harm, and suicide ideation. These interventions were delivered in diverse formats, including group delivery and self-guided interventions, with support from mental health professionals or involving lay professionals. The study designs and evaluation encompassed a range of methodologies, including randomized controlled trials, mixed methods studies, and feasibility studies.

conclusionsWhile there have been notable advancements in DMHIs for adolescents in LMICs, the research base remains limited. Significant knowledge gaps persist regarding the long-term clinical benefits, the maturity and readiness of LMIC digital infrastructure, cultural appropriateness, and cost-effectiveness across the heterogeneous LMIC settings. Addressing these gaps necessitates large-scale, co-designed, and culturally sensitive DMHI trials. Future work should address this.