Evidence mapPaperPMID 40980165Full record

ArticleJHEP reports : innovation in hepatology2025

Effectiveness and active ingredients of digital behaviour change interventions for MASLD: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Hollie Smith, Rebecca Livingston, Kirsten Ashley, Matthew Cooper, Stuart McPherson, Alison Innerd, Kate Hallsworth, Leah Avery

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JHEP reports : innovation in hepatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Hollie SmithSchool of Health and Life Sciences, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, UK.
Rebecca LivingstonSchool of Social Sciences, Humanities and Law, Teesside University, Middlesborough, UK.
Kirsten AshleySchool of Health and Life Sciences, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, UK.
Matthew CooperNIHR Newcastle Patient Safety Research Collaborative, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Stuart McPhersonNIHR Newcastle Biomedical Research Centre, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Alison InnerdSchool of Health and Life Sciences, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, UK.
Kate HallsworthNIHR Newcastle Biomedical Research Centre, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Leah AverySchool of Health and Life Sciences, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background & Aims: Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) is the most prevalent liver condition worldwide. Successful management relies on targeting changes in lifestyle behaviours. Digital behaviour change interventions present a scalable approach to lifestyle change. The aim of this systematic review was to determine the effectiveness and active ingredients of digital behavior change interventions for improving weight and liver-related outcome measures in patients with MASLD. Methods: Five databases were searched up to 31 January 2025 for studies reporting on digital lifestyle behaviour change interventions for patients with MASLD. Data were meta-analysed or narratively synthesised depending on study design. Intervention content and features positively associated with changes in outcomes of interest were identified using promise analysis. Results: Eleven studies involving 1,288 participants fulfilled the review criteria. Digital behavior change interventions were not effective for reducing weight (weighted mean difference [WMD] -2.07 kg [-6.08 to 1.94 kg]). Likewise, they did not lead to statistically significant improvements in alanine transaminase and aspartate transaminase (WMD -9.14 [-20.33 to 2.05] and WMD -5.81 [-12.96 to 1.35], respectively). Interventions varied in terms of mode of delivery ( Conclusions: Digital behaviour change interventions did not improve weight and liver-related outcomes measures in patients with MASLD. However, the inclusion of proposed specific intervention ingredients is likely to improve effectiveness. Impact and implications: This review is the first of its kind to report on the effectiveness and active ingredients of digital behaviour change interventions for the management of MASLD. Although the interventions reviewed were not effective overall, specific features and content of those interventions were associated with effectiveness. These insights can be used to inform the development of new interventions or to optimise existing interventions that could improve effectiveness. Findings also suggest that digital behaviour change interventions are beneficial for a proportion of individuals, and future research should focus on identifying who those individuals are. Significant heterogeneity between interventions was evident in terms of mode of delivery, behavioural change content, duration, and frequency of delivery. To truly determine the effectiveness of digital behaviour change interventions for patients with MASLD, they should be systematically developed using behaviour change theory and in accordance with a recognised intervention development framework.

Indexed as

DietMASHNAFLDPhysical activitySteatotic liver disease

Identifiers

PMID40980165
PMCPMC12448008

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.