Translating Research Evidence Into Marketplace Application: Cohort Study of Internet-Based Intervention Platforms for Perinatal Depression

Background: Internet-based intervention platforms may improve access to mental health care for women with perinatal depression (PND). Though the majority of platforms in the market lack an evidence base, a small number of them are supported by research evidence. Objective: This study aims to assess the current status of internet-based PND intervention platforms supported by published evidence, understand the reasons behind the disappearance of any of these previously accessible platforms, examine adjustments made by those active platforms between research trials and market implementation, and evaluate their current quality. Methods: A cohort of internet-based PND intervention platforms was first identified by systematic searches in multiple academic databases from database inception until March 26, 2021. We searched on the World Wide Web and the iOS and Android app stores to assess which of these were available in the marketplace between April and May 2021. The basic characteristics of all platforms were collected. For inaccessible platforms, inquiries were made via email to the authors of publications to determine the reasons for their unavailability. We compared the intervention-related information of accessible platforms in the marketplace with that reported in original publications and conducted quality assessments using the App Evaluation Model of the American Psychiatric Association. Fisher exact tests were used to compare the functional characteristics in publications of available and unavailable platforms and to investigate potential associations between functional adjustments or quality indices and platform survival time. Results: Out of 35 platforms supported by research evidence, only 19 (54%) were still accessible in the marketplace. The main reason for platforms disappearing was the termination of research projects. No statistically significant differences were found in functional characteristics between available and unavailable platforms. A total of 18 (95%) platforms adapted their core functions from what was reported in related publications. The adjustments included changes to intervention methods (11/19, 58%), target population (10/19, 53%), human resources for intervention support (9/19, 47%), mood assessment and monitoring (8/19, 42%), communication modality (4/19, 21%), and platform type (2/19, 11%). Quality issues across platforms included low frequency of update, lack of crisis management mechanism, poor user interactivity, and weak evidence base or absence of citation of supporting evidence. Platforms that survived longer than 10 years had a higher tendency to use external resources from third parties compared to those that survived less than 10 years (P=.04). No significant differences were found for functional adjustments or other quality indices. Conclusions: Internet-based platforms supported by evidence were not effectively translated into real-world practice. It is unclear if adjustments to accessible platforms made during actual operation may undermine the proven validity of the original research. Future research to explore the reasons behind the success of the implementation of evidence-based platforms in the marketplace is warranted.