Quality Assessment
BLIND
The level of methodological detail presented in the included studies varied but was overall high. The mean study quality score, determined using the CHEC list, was 71% (SD 0.18%; Although all RCT-based EE (5/5, 100%) performed sensitivity analyses (ie, univariate and multivariate scenarios as well as one-way and multiway deterministic sensitivity analyses), only 29% (2/7) of the nonrandomized study–based EE [RoB was similarly heterogeneous for RCTs, nonrandomized studies, and modeling studies, with important overall risks of bias across studies. None of the RCTs were classified as having a low RoB in any of the 6 categories. Owing to the digital nature of the DTx, participants (or personnel) were not blind to assignment and could therefore expect to receive either an active treatment or a placebo. Consequently, most RCT-based studies (4/5, 80%) [Among the nonrandomized studies, none received an overall low-risk classification (Finally, among the modeling studies, RoB was classified as unclear in the category of bias related to internal consistency in all 6 studies, none of which explicitly reported exploring this (