ArticleSubstance use & misuse2017
Potential Risks of Ecological Momentary Assessment Among Persons Who Inject Drugs.
Article in Substance use & misuse, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Smartphone-Based Ecological Momentary Assessment to Monitor Opioid Use and Overdose Among People Who Use Opioids: Prospective Observational Feasibility Study.JMIR human factors · 2026Observational
- Ethical considerations for the use of ecological momentary assessment in non-suicidal self-injury research.Ethics & behavior · 2025Article
- Navigating ethical challenges in psychological research involving digital remote technologies and people who use alcohol or drugs.The American psychologist · 2024Article
- Feasibility of Using Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) to Collect Daily Experiences of Parent-Child Dyads: Ecological Momentary Assessment Study.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- Mobile phone and internet use among people who inject drugs: Implications for mobile health interventions.Substance abuse · 2022Article
- Patterns of Missing Data With Ecological Momentary Assessment Among People Who Use Drugs: Feasibility Study Using Pilot Study Data.JMIR formative research · 2021Article
- Practical problems and positive experiences with ecological momentary assessment: reflections from people who use drugs.The American journal of drug and alcohol abuse · 2021Article
- Privacy, Confidentiality, and Safety Considerations for Conducting Geographic Momentary Assessment Studies Among Persons Who Use Drugs and Men Who Have Sex with Men.Journal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine · 2020Article
- Mobile Internet Technologies, Ecological Momentary Assessment, and Intervention-Poison and Remedy for New Online Problematic Behaviors in ICD-11.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2020Article
- The risk-benefit ratio of studying psychiatric symptoms via daily diary methods.Accountability in research · 2019Article
- Potential benefits of using ecological momentary assessment to study high-risk polydrug use.mHealth · 2017Article
- Acceptability of an Opioid Relapse Prevention Text-message Intervention for Emergency Department Patients.Journal of addiction medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEcological momentary assessment (EMA)-which often involves brief surveys delivered via mobile technology-has transformed our understanding of the individual and contextual micro-processes associated with legal and illicit drug use. However, little empirical research has focused on participant's perspective on the probability and magnitude of potential risks in EMA studies.
objectivesTo garner participant perspectives on potential risks common to EMA studies of illicit drug use.
methodsWe interviewed 38 persons who inject drugs living in San Diego (CA) and Philadelphia (PA), United States. They completed simulations of an EMA tool and then underwent a semi-structured interview that systematically explored domains of risk considered within the proposed revisions to the Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects or the "Common Rule." Interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded systematically to explore psychological, physical, social, legal, and informational risks from participation.
resultsParticipants perceived most risks to be minimal. Some indicated that repetitive questioning about mood or drug use could cause psychological (i.e., anxiety) or behavioral risks (i.e., drug use relapse). Ironically, the questions that were viewed as risky were considered motivational to engage in healthy behaviors. The most cited risks were legal and social risks stemming from participant concerns about data collection and security. IMPORTANCE: Improving our understanding of these issues is an essential first step to protect human participants in future EMA research. We provide a brief set of recommendations that can aid in the design and ethics review of the future EMA protocol with substance using populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.