The Use of Technology in the Clinical Care of Depression

An Evidence Map

Published in: The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, Volume 79, Number 5 (September/October 2018). doi:10.4088/JCP.18r12118

Posted on on August 22, 2018

by Eric Apaydin, Alicia Ruelaz Maher, Laura Raaen, Sangita M. Baxi, Aneesa Motala, Roberta M. Shanman, Susanne Hempel

Read More

Access further information on this document at The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.


Depression is a highly prevalent clinical condition. The use of technologies in the clinical care of depressive disorders may increase the reach of clinical services for these disorders and support more comprehensive treatment. The objective of this evidence map is to provide an overview of the use of technology in the clinical care of depression.

Data Sources

We searched PubMed, PsycINFO, and the Web of Science from inception to June 2017 to identify published randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Study Selection

Two reviewers used predetermined eligibility criteria to review 4,062 records and include 161 RCTs that met our inclusion criteria. We include studies evaluating any type of treatment-related technology in the clinical care of depression.

Data Extraction

We extracted data on sample sizes, the type of technology examined, the function of that technology, the effectiveness of the technology, and publication year.


Out of 161 RCTs, we found the greatest amount of research for psychotherapy by computer (51 RCTs). The majority of studies were published after 2012 (94 RCTs; 58%). Few published studies involved videoconferences or smartphones, or provider feedback or auto-reminders. 145 studies (90%) reported that the intervention had a positive outcome of symptom improvement compared to baseline.


This evidence map provides a broad overview of the existing research evaluating technology in depression care. Computer applications are still most common. Almost all applications yield symptom improvement. More information is needed to evaluate the role of technology in clinical care.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.