Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Smartphone-delivered EASE and MR interventions show no significant difference in anxiety and depressionTwo Digital Mental Health Apps Show Similar Results

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Note that both EASE and MR digital interventions showed similar outcomes for anxiety and depression at 6 months.

This randomized controlled trial enrolled 822 racially and ethnically diverse adults from the United States presenting with elevated anxiety and/or depression. Participants were randomized to receive either a smartphone-delivered anxiety, depression, and anxiety sensitivity reduction intervention (EASE) or a mindfulness and relaxation-based (MR) digital intervention.

At the 6-month primary endpoint, between-group differences in anxiety and depression symptoms were small and not statistically significant. However, within-person effect sizes indicated decreases in anxiety, depression, probable clinical anxiety and/or depression disorder status, anxiety sensitivity, and COVID-19 fear across both groups through the follow-up period.

Safety data, including adverse events and discontinuation rates, were not reported. A primary limitation of the study is that exploratory subgroup analyses were not powered to test moderation or equivalence. Both the EASE and MR interventions were noted as low cost and highly disseminatable options for managing mental health in diverse populations.

How this fits prior evidence

How this fits prior evidence: This finding addresses a gap in digital health options for anxiety and depression. While non-pharmacological interventions significantly improve depression, anxiety, and sleep quality in hemodialysis patients, this study specifically evaluates the comparative efficacy of two distinct digital platforms (EASE and MR) for a broader, diverse population. The results suggest that while both digital interventions may provide clinical benefit, they do not differ significantly from one another in efficacy.

A randomized trial tested a smartphone program called EASE against a mindfulness and relaxation app. The study included 822 adults in the United States who had elevated anxiety or depression. The group was racially and ethnically diverse. The trial ran during the COVID-19 pandemic.

After 6 months, the two apps had similar results. The difference between them in anxiety and depression symptoms was small and not statistically significant. This means the study did not prove that one app was better than the other. Within each group, people did report decreases in anxiety, depression, and related measures over time. These included probable clinical anxiety or depression status, anxiety sensitivity, and COVID-19 fear.

The study did not report safety information, such as side effects or how many people stopped using the apps. One limitation is that the exploratory subgroup analyses were not designed to test whether one app worked better for certain groups of people.

Both apps were described as low cost and easy to share widely. They offered some clinical benefit in a diverse sample during the pandemic. But because the difference between the apps was not statistically significant, readers should not assume one is clearly better than the other. If you are considering a digital tool for anxiety or depression, talk with your doctor about what might be right for you.

What this means for you:
Two digital mental health apps had similar results for anxiety and depression over 6 months.

Common questions

What was the main finding of this digital mental health app study?

The study compared a smartphone program called EASE with a mindfulness and relaxation app in 822 adults with elevated anxiety or depression. After 6 months, the difference between the two apps in anxiety and depression symptoms was small and not statistically significant. Both groups reported decreases in symptoms over time.

Who was included in this study?

The study included 822 racially and ethnically diverse adults from the United States. All had elevated anxiety, depression, or both. The trial took place during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study did not report results for specific subgroups because those analyses were not powered to test differences.

Were there any side effects from the apps?

The study did not report safety information, including adverse events, serious adverse events, or how many people stopped using the apps. Because this information was not reported, it is not possible to say whether the apps had any side effects or tolerability issues based on this study alone.

Does this mean one app is better than the other?

No. The difference between the two apps was small and not statistically significant. This means the study did not prove that one app was better than the other. Both apps were described as low cost and easy to share widely, and both groups showed decreases in symptoms over the 6-month follow-up.

Study Details

Study typeRct
EvidenceLevel 2
Follow-up459.6 mo
PublishedOct 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
OBJECTIVE: The study evaluated the impact of two smartphone-based interventions on anxiety and depression symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD: Racially and ethnically diverse adults from the United States (US) with elevated anxiety and/or depression (N = 822; 64.4% female; M = 38.3 years, SD = 12.76) were randomly assigned to receive a smartphone delivered anxiety, depression, and anxiety sensitivity reduction intervention (EASE) or a mindfulness and relaxation-based (MR) digital intervention; 206 (25.1%) identified as African American, 208 (25.3%) as American Indian, 202 (24.6%) as Latinx, and 206 (25.1%) as non-Latinx White. RESULTS: There was a high degree of engagement for both groups. For our primary analysis, between-group differences at the 6-month primary endpoint were small and not statistically significant for anxiety and depression. Within-person effect sizes indicated decreases in anxiety, depression, probable clinical anxiety and/or depression disorder status, anxiety sensitivity, and COVID-19 fear through the follow-up. Exploratory subgroup analyses suggested variable patterns of within-condition change across racial and ethnic groups, but these analyses were not powered to test moderation or equivalence. CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicated that two low cost and highly disseminatable digital interventions that targeted distinct psychological processes offered clinical benefit among a diverse sample of adults in the US during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.