Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35016567›Full record

SynthesisAssessment2023

Ecological Momentary Assessment: A Meta-Analysis on Designs, Samples, and Compliance Across Research Fields.

Cornelia Wrzus, Andreas B Neubauer

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Assessment, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 249 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
249citing papers in PubMed, 13 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

249 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. A systematic review of ecological momentary assessment in autism research.Autism : the international journal of research and practice · 2025
    Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

189 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

Cornelia WrzusRuprecht Karls University of Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6290-959X
Andreas B NeubauerDIPF-Leibniz Institute for Research and Information in Education, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-0515-1126

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ecological Momentary Assessments (i.e., EMA, repeated assessments in daily life) are widespread in many fields of psychology and related disciplines. Yet, little knowledge exists on how differences in study designs and samples predict study compliance and dropout-two central parameters of data quality in (micro-)longitudinal research. The current meta-analysis included k = 477 articles (496 samples, total

Indexed as

Data AccuracyEcological Momentary AssessmentHumansKnowledgeResearch Designambulatory assessmentsdropoutecological momentary assessmentexperience sampling methodmeta-analysisstudy compliance

Identifiers

PMID35016567
PMCPMC9999286

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.