Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31066701›Full record

ArticleJMIR mental health2019

When All Else Fails, Listen to the Patient: A Viewpoint on the Use of Ecological Momentary Assessment in Clinical Trials.

Aaron M Mofsen, Thomas L Rodebaugh, Ginger E Nicol, Colin A Depp, J Philip Miller, Eric J Lenze

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mental health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Digital and precision clinical trials: innovations for testing mental health medications, devices, and psychosocial treatments.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2024
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Aaron M MofsenDepartment of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, MO, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6471-1800
Thomas L RodebaughDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, MO, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6814-7795
Ginger E NicolDepartment of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, MO, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5823-6129
Colin A DeppDepartment of Psychiatry, University of California - San Diego, San Diego, CA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1841-6229
J Philip MillerDivision of Biostatistics, School of Medicine, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, MO, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4568-6846
Eric J LenzeDepartment of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, MO, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0471-9368

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A major problem in mental health clinical trials, such as depression, is low assay sensitivity in primary outcome measures. This has contributed to clinical trial failures, resulting in the exodus of the pharmaceutical industry from the Central Nervous System space. This reduced assay sensitivity in psychiatry outcome measures stems from inappropriately broad measures, recall bias, and poor interrater reliability. Limitations in the ability of traditional measures to differentiate between the trait versus state-like nature of individual depressive symptoms also contributes to measurement error in clinical trials. In this viewpoint, we argue that ecological momentary assessment (EMA)-frequent, real time, in-the-moment assessments of outcomes, delivered via smartphone-can both overcome these psychometric challenges and reduce clinical trial failures by increasing assay sensitivity and minimizing recall and rater bias. Used in this manner, EMA has the potential to further our understanding of treatment response by allowing for the assessment of dynamic interactions between treatment and distinct symptom response.

Indexed as

controlled clinical trialecological momentary assessmenthealth technologymental healthpsychiatry

Identifiers

PMID31066701
PMCPMC6524455

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.