@文章{信息:doi/10.2196/36620，作者=“Davis, Jacqueline A和Ohan, Jeneva L和Gibson, Lisa Y和Prescott, Susan L和finlaye - jones, Amy L”，标题=“了解围产期妇女数字心理健康和福祉项目的参与:无元分析的系统回顾”，期刊=“J医学互联网研究”，年=“2022”，月=“8”，日=“9”，卷=“24”，数=“8”，页=“e36620”，关键词=“数字干预;围产期;心理健康;幸福;逻辑模型;系统评价;背景:怀孕和产后是心理压力增加的时期，这对母亲和发育中的孩子都是不利的。数字干预是具有成本效益和可获得的工具，可在围产期支持妇女的积极心理健康。虽然研究报告了有效性，但关于网络干预的一个关键问题是缺乏参与导致退出，缺乏参与，或降低潜在的干预效益。目的:本系统综述旨在了解围产期实施数字心理、心理健康或福祉干预研究的报告和参与水平。 Specific objectives were to understand how studies report engagement across 4 domains specified in the Connect, Attend, Participate, and Enact (CAPE) model, make recommendations on best practices to report engagement in digital mental health interventions (DMHIs), and understand levels of engagement in intervention studies in this area. To maximize the utility of this systematic review, we intended to develop practical tools for public health use: to develop a logic model to reference the theory of change, evaluate the studies using the CAPE framework, and develop a guide for future data collection to enable consistent reporting in digital interventions. Methods: This systematic review used the Cochrane Synthesis Without Meta-analysis reporting guidelines. This study aimed to identify studies reporting DMHIs delivered during the perinatal period in women with subclinical mood symptoms. A systematic database search was used to identify relevant papers using the Ovid Platform for MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Medical Subject Headings on Demand for all English-language articles published in the past 10 years. Results: Searches generated a database of 3473 potentially eligible studies, with a final selection of 16 (0.46{\%}) studies grouped by study design. Participant engagement was evaluated using the CAPE framework and comparable variables were described. All studies reported at least one engagement metric. However, the measures used were inconsistent, which may have contributed to the wide-ranging results. There was insufficient reporting for enactment (ie, participants' real-world use of intervention skills), with only 38{\%} (6/16) of studies clearly recording longer-term practice through postintervention interviews. The logic model proposes ways of conceptualizing and reporting engagement details in DMHIs more consistently in the future. Conclusions: The perinatal period is the optimal time to intervene with strength-based digital tools to build positive mental health. Despite the growing number of studies on digital interventions, few robustly explore engagement, and there is limited evidence of long-term skill use beyond the intervention period. Our results indicate variability in the reporting of both short- and long-term participant engagement behaviors, and we recommend the adoption of standardized reporting metrics in future digital interventions. Trial Registration: PROSPERO CRD42020162283; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display{\_}record.php?RecordID=162283 ", issn="1438-8871", doi="10.2196/36620", url="//www.mybigtv.com/2022/8/e36620", url="https://doi.org/10.2196/36620", url="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35943773" }