Chronic diseases represent one of the main causes of death worldwide. The integration of digital solutions in clinical interventions is broadly diffused today; however, evidence on their efficacy in addressing psychological comorbidities of chronic diseases is sparse. This systematic review analyzes and synthesizes the evidence about the efficacy of digital interventions on psychological comorbidities outcomes of specific chronic diseases. According to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a systematic search of PubMed, PsycInfo, Scopus and Web of Science databases was conducted. Only Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) were considered and either depression or anxiety had to be assessed to match the selection criteria. Of the 7636 identified records, 17 matched the inclusion criteria: 9 digital interventions on diabetes, 4 on cardiovascular diseases, 3 on Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and one on stroke. Of the 17 studies reviewed, 14 found digital interventions to be effective. Quantitative synthesis highlighted a moderate and significant overall effect of interventions on depression, while the effect on anxiety was small and non-significant. Design elements making digital interventions effective for psychological comorbidities of chronic diseases were singled out: (a) implementing a communication loop with patients and (b) providing disease-specific digital contents. This focus on “how” to design technologies can facilitate the translation of evidence into practice.

Despite the widespread prevalence of mental health problems, most psychological distress remains untreated. Internet-based psychological interventions can be an essential tool for increasing treatment availability and accessibility. The main objective of the MindBlooming project is to design and implement an innovative Internet-based multi-approach treatment for university students suffering from psychological or physical problems. The intervention will focus on symptoms of depression, anxiety, sleep problems, self-destructive thoughts, job- and study-related stress and burnout, and chronic pain. It will be based on different approaches, primarily psychoeducation, Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment (CBT), and third-wave CBT. At the end of the treatment, user satisfaction and usability will be assessed. In addition, two further aims will be evaluating the treatment efficacy through a randomized controlled trial and tuning a predictive model through Machine Learning techniques. The intervention consists of a 7-week treatment on two problematic areas according to each students’ personal needs, identified through an initial assessment. Besides the treatment assigned following the initial screening, participants will also be assigned to a different module to improve their relational skills. The treatment, which can be accessed through a mobile app, consists of psychoeducational videos followed by related exercises. We expect MindBlooming to be a remarkable tool for promoting the mental health of university students.

The Body‐Specificity Hypothesis suggests that the area around the dominant hand is perceived positively, contrasting with a negative perception around the non‐dominant hand. Given the pervasive use of interactive technologies, our study aimed to investigate body‐specific associations in real‐world settings, examining whether these are modulated by mainstream digital gestures like swiping. N = 30 right‐handed participants (Experiment 1) and N = 30 left‐handed participants (Experiment 2) were asked to make valence judgements on 28 valence‐laden images on a tablet, with each hand in separate sessions, engaging in a congruent task (swipe towards the dominant side—positive, swipe towards the non‐dominant side—negative) and an incongruent task (the opposite response pattern). Following the valence judgement task, participants assessed the intensity of their responses using a 9‐point Likert scale. Results indicated that right‐handers were faster in the congruent condition than in the incongruent condition and showed faster responses when swiping for negative images with the non‐dominant hand. Left‐handed participants did not show differences in response times but evaluated images as more positive/negative in the congruent condition compared to the incongruent. Overall, these findings support the Body‐Specificity Hypothesis and underscore the importance of considering the embodied‐cognition‐framework as susceptible to the influence of technology use.

Summary: The Body Specificity Hypothesis (BSH) suggests that individuals tend to associate positive evaluations with the space corresponding to their dominant hand and negative evaluations with the non-dominant hand. Valence reinforcement effects, related to BSH, have been demonstrated when stimuli are evaluated following lateral hand movements (e.g., dominant hand rightward—positive, non-dominant hand leftward—negative) on large touchscreens and keyboards. However, limited research has explored how spatial stimuli affect explicit valence judgments without motor responses. This study investigated the impact of spatial placement across different visual fields on valence judgments of neutral images, comparing right- and left-handed individuals. Thirty participants (15 right-handed, 15 left-handed) rated neutral images displayed in the center, right, or left visual field using a 9-point Likert scale. Two experimental sessions were conducted, separated by a 3-week washout period. The first session measured baseline valence evaluations (VE) with images presented centrally, while the second session randomized the images to the left and right visual fields. Results revealed that left-handers tended to assign higher VE to images located in the left visual field (LVF) compared to the center visual field (CVF; p = .02), while right-handers rated images in the LVF more negatively than those in the CVF ( p = .007). Additionally, left-handed participants exhibited a flatter pattern across spatial placements. These findings may suggest that body-specific associations are stronger in right-handed individuals, while left-handers may show reduced sensitivity to body- specific associations, due to the predominance of right-handed design in digital technologies.