ArticleJMIR formative research2021
Development of a Mobile App for Ecological Momentary Assessment of Circadian Data: Design Considerations and Usability Testing.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development of Open Backend Structures for Health Care Professionals to Improve Participation in App Developments: Pilot Usability Study of a Medical App.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- Obesity and Overweight: Probing Causes, Consequences, and Novel Therapeutic Approaches Through the American Heart Association's Strategically Focused Research Network.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2023Review
- Association of Eating and Sleeping Intervals With Weight Change Over Time: The Daily24 Cohort.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2023Article
- Electronic Health Record-Based Recruitment and Retention and Mobile Health App Usage: Multisite Cohort Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCollecting data on daily habits across a population of individuals is challenging. Mobile-based circadian ecological momentary assessment (cEMA) is a powerful frame for observing the impact of daily living on long-term health.
objectiveIn this paper, we (1) describe the design, testing, and rationale for specifications of a mobile-based cEMA app to collect timing of eating and sleeping data and (2) compare cEMA and survey data collected as part of a 6-month observational cohort study. The ultimate goal of this paper is to summarize our experience and lessons learned with the Daily24 mobile app and to highlight the pros and cons of this data collection modality.
methodsDesign specifications for the Daily24 app were drafted by the study team based on the research questions and target audience for the cohort study. The associated backend was optimized to provide real-time data to the study team for participant monitoring and engagement. An external 8-member advisory board was consulted throughout the development process, and additional test users recruited as part of a qualitative study provided feedback through in-depth interviews.
resultsAfter ≥4 days of at-home use, 37 qualitative study participants provided feedback on the app. The app generally received positive feedback from test users for being fast and easy to use. Test users identified several bugs and areas where modifications were necessary to in-app text and instructions and also provided feedback on the engagement strategy. Data collected through the mobile app captured more variability in eating windows than data collected through a one-time survey, though at a significant cost.
conclusionsResearchers should consider the potential uses of a mobile app beyond the initial data collection when deciding whether the time and monetary expenditure are advisable for their situation and goals.
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.