The ability of digital mental health interventions (DMHIs) to reduce mental health disparities relies on the recruitment of research participants with diverse sociodemographic and self-identity characteristics. Despite its importance, sociodemographic reporting in research is often limited, and the state of reporting practices in DMHI research in particular has not been comprehensively reviewed.

To characterise the state of sociodemographic data reported in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of app-based DMHIs published globally from 2007 to 2022.

A scoping review of RCTs of app-based DMHIs examined reporting frequency for 16 sociodemographic domains (eg, gender) and common category options within each domain (eg, woman). The search queried five electronic databases. 5079 records were screened and 299 articles were included.

On average, studies reported 4.64 (SD=1.79; range 0–9) of 16 sociodemographic domains. The most common were age (97%) and education (67%). The least common were housing situation (6%), residency/location (5%), veteran status (4%), number of children (3%), sexual orientation (2%), disability status (2%) and food security (

This review describes the widespread underreporting of sociodemographic information in RCTs of app-based DMHIs published from 2007 to 2022. Reporting was often incomplete (eg, % female only), unclear (eg, the conflation of gender/sex) and limited (eg, only options representing majority groups were reported). Trends suggest reporting has somewhat improved in recent years. Diverse participant populations must be welcomed and described in DMHI research to broaden learning and the generalisability of results, a prerequisite of DMHI’s potential to reduce disparities in mental healthcare.

Employee Occupational Health (‘occupational health’) clinicians have expansive perspectives of the experience of healthcare personnel. Integrating mental health into the purview of occupational health is a newer approach that could combat historical limitations of healthcare personnel mental health programmes, which have been isolated and underused.

We aimed to document innovation and opportunities for supporting healthcare personnel mental health through occupational health clinicians. This work was part of a national qualitative needs assessment of employee occupational health clinicians during COVID-19 who were very much at the centre of organisational responses.

This qualitative needs assessment included key informant interviews obtained using snowball sampling methods.

We interviewed 43 US Veterans Health Administration occupational health clinicians from 29 facilities.

This analysis focused on personnel mental health needs and opportunities, using consensus coding of interview transcripts and modified member checking.

Three major opportunities to support mental health through occupational health involved: (1) expanded mental health needs of healthcare personnel, including opportunities to support work-related concerns (eg, traumatic deployments), home-based concerns and bereavement (eg, working with chaplains); (2) leveraging expanded roles and protocols to address healthcare personnel mental health concerns, including opportunities in expanding occupational health roles, cross-disciplinary partnerships (eg, with employee assistance programmes (EAP)) and process/protocol (eg, acute suicidal ideation pathways) and (3) need for supporting occupational health clinicians’ own mental health, including opportunities to address overwork/burn-out with adequate staffing/resources.

Occupational health can enact strategies to support personnel mental health: to structurally sustain attention, use social cognition tools (eg, suicidality protocols or expanded job descriptions); to leverage distributed attention, enhance interdisciplinary collaboration (eg, chaplains for bereavement support or EAP) and to equip systems with resources and allow for flexibility during crises, including increased staffing.

Public health interventions are designed to improve specific health-related outcomes; however, they may also produce negative side effects, such as substitution use, psychological or social harms. Knowledge about the unintended effects of school-based smoking preventive interventions is sparse. Hence, this study examined these potential unintended effects of the smoking-reducing intervention, Focus, among students in the vocational education and training setting.

Cluster randomised controlled trial stratified by school type with 5 months follow-up.

Across Denmark, eight schools were randomised to the intervention group (n=844 students, response proportion 76%) and six schools to the control group (n=815 students, response proportion 75%). This study focused solely on students who smoked at baseline (N=491).

The intervention was developed systematically based on theory and a thoroughly mixed-methods needs assessment. Intervention components included a comprehensive school tobacco policy (smoke-free school hours) supported by a 3-day course for school staff and launched by an edutainment session for students; class-based lessons and a quit-and-win competition; and individual telephone smoking cessation support.

Alternative tobacco and nicotine products (regular use of smokeless tobacco, hookah and e-cigarettes), regular cannabis use, boredom and loneliness at school, stress and perceived stigmatisation among smokers.

We found no statistically significant unintended effects of the intervention. Nonetheless, insignificant findings indicated that students in the intervention group were less likely to be bored during school hours (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.10) and experience stress (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.10), but more likely to report feeling stigmatised compared with the control group (OR 1.55, 95% CI 0.71 to 3.40).

Overall, findings suggested no unintended effects of the Focus trial with respect to substitution use, psychological, nor group or social harms. Future research is encouraged to report potential harmful outcomes of smoking preventive interventions, and interventions should be aware of the possible stigmatisation of smokers.

ISRCTN16455577.