Is There a Role for Apps in the Self-Management of Bipolar Disorder?

Bipolar disorder (BD) affects 1–2% of the population and is characterized by recurrent mood episodes linked to chronic functional impairment, increased morbidity, and early mortality. Like other chronic conditions, BD requires long-term pharmacotherapy, monitoring, and psychosocial interventions, as well as self-management strategies to support stability, reduce relapse risk, and improve quality of life .The advent of mHealth tools, such as smartphone apps, has the potential to enhance self-management by enabling symptom monitoring, patient education, early detection of acute episodes, and support for medication adherence and healthy lifestyle changes (Moon & Walsh, 2025). Although digital tools have the potential to fill gaps in patient care, integration of apps into clinical practice remains a challenge.

Evidence for the Efficacy of Apps

Research on mHealth interventions for BD is growing, but variability in methodology and technical limitations makes it difficult to synthesize evidence meaningfully (e.g., via meta-analysis). A scoping literature review highlights barriers to widespread clinical integration, including inconsistent mHealth tool quality and a lack of robust evidence on efficacy and feasibility (Eis et al., 2022; Henning et al., 2025; Ortiz et al., 2021). A systematic search and evaluation of commercially available apps found that only 2% are backed by published research supporting efficacy, among over 20,000 apps, only 5% have any empirical support (Eis et al., 2022). Studies assessing the efficacy of apps in reducing psychiatric symptoms, psychological distress, and harmful behaviors and implementing lifestyle changes show mixed results (Magwood et al., 2024) and apps are not dependable in episode prediction (Ortiz et al., 2021). On the other hand, evidence supports the use of digital tools to enhance medication adherence: Forgetfulness is a common reason for suboptimal adherence, and customizable mHealth tools improve adherence (Blixen et al., 2018; Walsh & Moon, 2025).

Barriers to Patient Engagement

Low patient acceptability and limited data on longitudinal engagement hinder the effective use of apps for self-management. Despite the chronic nature of BD, there is a lack of long-term studies evaluating mHealth interventions (Henning et al., 2025; Magwood et al., 2024). Additionally, the short lifespan of apps—defined as the time between development and obsolescence—complicates longitudinal evaluation (Castro et al., 2022). The literature documents multiple barriers to acceptability of apps for BD. Among individuals downloading mental health apps, rates of sustained use were between 0.5% and 28.6% (Linardon et al., 2025). Patient’s concerns about data privacy are prevalent, cost, and limited digital literacy are cited as barriers to adoption and long-term engagement (Galvao, 2026; Patoz et al., 2021). These barriers can be addressed by engaging individuals with BD in the development and evaluation of mHealth tools. The input of individuals with a lived experience understanding of the needs of target can improve accessibility, acceptability and prevent the exacerbation of existing health disparities (Majid et al., 2024; Moon & Walsh, 2025).

Barriers to App Integration Into Care

Clinicians need strong evidence before adopting interventions. Currently, most app development is driven by investors and tech specialists, with insufficient focus on efficacy, safety, or data security (Merscher et al., 2024). Greater collaboration among researchers, clinicians, and app developers is essential to improve mHealth intervention quality. Furthermore, there is a need to integrate mHealth into clinicians’ workflows and to create a framework for reimbursement before apps can be integrated into patient care reimbursement (Galvao et al., 2026; Henning et al., 2025). The mHealth industry is unregulated, producing growing number of apps of uneven quality. Without regulation or a standardized framework for evaluation and the burden of determining whether an app is a helpful adjunct to treatment falls on clinicians. Although a number of frameworks for evaluating apps have been proposed, further research is needed to bridge the evidence and quality gap in the commercial marketplace before apps can be routinely integrated into the treatment of BD.

The Clinician’s Role: App Selection and Support

Despite variability in quality and evidence gaps, some patients may find apps useful for understanding their diagnosis, tracking treatment responses, or supporting medication adherence. The role of the clinician is to advise patients on app evaluation and selection, to set collaborative goals for app use, to decide whether review of data will be incorporated into visits, monitor for safety, and to support adherence. Apps used under the guidance of clinicians have the potential to improve self-management in patients.

Resources for App selection

App store reviews: Patients must be cautioned against reliance on these reviews, which prioritize clinically-irrelevant criteria while overlooking patient safety, privacy, and evidence-base. There is no correlation between health app visibility in online stores and quality as assessed by mental health specialists.

Expert Review Repositories: Databases and meta-repositories including reviews by experts in formats accessible to non-clinicians. Reviews may not be up-to date due to app updates or discontinuation. Examples:   Mind M-Health Index (Mobile Health Index and Navigation Database, App Evaluation Resources) and Navigation Database (MIND), Open mHealth (Mind Apps-Health Index & Navigation Database – HeadsUp), ORCHA (Paywall-Orcha Verify)

Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS): Assesses apps on multiple domains, including  engagement, functionality, information quality, and subjective qualities (MARS – The Mobile Application Rating Scale | UX test tools)

American Psychiatric Association (APA) Assessment Framework: https://www.psychiatry.org/psychiatrists/practice/mental-health-apps/the-app-evaluation-model

Evaluation of mHealth tools should include the following fundamental criteria proposed by the APA:

• Accessibility: Is the app regularly updated and functional?

• Security and Privacy: Is patient data protected? Is the privacy policy transparent, is there a patient emergency protocol?
• Evidence Base: Does the app have empirical support?
• Clinical Relevance: Is it aligned with clinical needs?
• User Engagement: Is the interface intuitive and does it encourage consistent use?
• Interoperability: Can it be used across platforms? Can data be shared with clinicians during visits?

References

American Psychiatric Association (n.d.). The app advisor: An American psychiatric association initiative. Psychiatry.org – The App Evaluation Model

Blixen, C., Sajatovic, M., Moore, D. J., Depp, C., Cushman, C., Cage, J., Barboza, M., Eskew, L., Klein, P., & Levin, J. B. (2018). Patient Participation in the Development of a Customized M-Health Intervention to Improve Medication Adherence in Poorly Adherent Individuals with Bipolar Disorder (BD) and Hypertension (HTN). International journal of healthcare, 4(1), 25–35.

Castro R, Ribeiro-Alves M, Oliveira C, Romero CP, Perazzo H, Simjanoski M,

Kapciznki F, Balanzá-Martínez V, De Boni RB. What Are We Measuring When We

Evaluate Digital Interventions for Improving Lifestyle? A Scoping Meta-Review.

Front Public Health. 2022 Jan 3;9:735624. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.735624. PMID:

35047469; PMCID: PMC8761632

Eis S, Solà-Morales O, Duarte-Díaz A, Vidal-Alaball J, Perestelo-Pérez L,

Robles N, Carrion C. Mobile Applications in Mood Disorders and Mental Health:

Systematic Search in Apple App Store and Google Play Store and Review of the Literature. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Feb 15;19(4):2186.

Galvão MCB, Rodrigues DR, da Silva BP, Villasboas PLB, Mason OJ, Ricarte ILM.

Digital technologies for long-term management of bipolar disorder: advances and challenges. Braz J Psychiatry. 2026;48:e20254253.

Henning TJ, Rakitzis O, Kaminski J, Kokwaro L, Fürstenau D, Lech S, Schreiter

S. Scoping Review zur Identifikation und Bewertung verfügbarer digitaler

Anwendungen bei bipolarer Störung [Scoping review on the identification and

evaluation of available digital applications for bipolar disorder]. Nervenarzt.

2025 Sep;96(5):423-431.

Linardon, J., & Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, M. (2020). Attrition and adherence in smartphone-delivered interventions for mental health problems: A systematic and meta-analytic review. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 88(1), 1.

Magwood O, Saad A, Ranger D, Volpini K, Rukikamirera F, Haridas R, Sayfi S,

Alexander J, Tan Y, Pottie K. Mobile apps to reduce depressive symptoms and

alcohol use in youth: A systematic review and meta-analysis: A systematic

review. Campbell Syst Rev. 2024 Apr 26;20(2):e1398.

Majid S, Reeves S, Figueredo G, Brown S, Lang A, Moore M, Morriss R. The

Extent of User Involvement in the Design of Self-tracking Technology for Bipolar

Disorder: Literature Review. JMIR Ment Health. 2021 Dec 20;8(12):e27991.

Moon, Z., & Walsh, J. (2025). Digital interventions in medication adherence: A narrative review of current evidence and challenges. Frontiers in Pharmacology, 16, 1632474.

Morton E, Nicholas J, Yang L, Lapadat L, Barnes SJ, Provencher MD, Depp C,

Chan M, Kulur R, Michalak EE. Evaluating the quality, safety, and functionality

of commonly used smartphone apps for bipolar disorder mood and sleep self-

management. Int J Bipolar Disord. 2022 Apr 4;10(1):10.

Ortiz A, Maslej MM, Husain MI, Daskalakis ZJ, Mulsant BH. Apps and gaps in

bipolar disorder: A systematic review on electronic monitoring for episode

prediction. J Affect Disord. 2021 Dec 1;295:1190-1200.

Patoz MC, Hidalgo-Mazzei D, Pereira B, Blanc O, de Chazeron I, Murru A,

Verdolini N, Pacchiarotti I, Vieta E, Llorca PM, Samalin L. Patients’ adherence

to smartphone apps in the management of bipolar disorder: a systematic review.

Int J Bipolar Disord. 2021 Jun 3;9(1):19.