Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35537542›Full record

ArticleJournal of affective disorders2022

Ecological momentary assessment of affect in depression-prone and control samples: Survey compliance and affective yield.

Andrew J Seidman, Charles J George, Maria Kovacs

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of affective disorders, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Andrew J SeidmanUniversity of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, United States of America. Electronic address: seidmanaj@upmc.edu.
Charles J GeorgeUniversity of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Department of Psychiatry, United States of America.
Maria KovacsUniversity of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, United States of America.
University of Pittsburgh · USUniversity of Pittsburgh Medical Center · US

Funding

CLINICAL RESEARCH TRAINING IN CHILD PSYCHIATRYT32MH018951 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI TINA R GOLDSTEIN · 1990 to 2026
$9.7M
Biobehavioral Inflexibility and Risk for Juvenile-Onset DepressionR01MH084938 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI KOVACS, MARIA · 2009 to 2024
$7.4M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH084938NIMH NIH HHS T32 MH018951
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEcological momentary assessment (EMA) is a high-frequency ambulatory data collection approach that has come to be widely used in emotion research. It therefore is timely to examine two features of EMA needed for a successful study: compliance with survey prompts and high affective yield (survey prompts that capture affect experience). We posit that compliance may be subject to temporal variation (time-of-day, days in study) and individual differences (depression history), and that affective yield may also differ by social context.

methodsWe examined these issues in a sample of 318 young adults (Mage = 24.7 years, SD = 2.7), including those with current depression (n = 28), remitted depression (n = 168) and never-depressed controls (n = 122) who participated in a 7-day EMA protocol of negative and positive affect (NA and PA, respectively).

resultsThe overall compliance rate was 91% and remained stable across the survey week. However, subjects were significantly less likely to respond to the first daily prompt compared to those that followed. The likelihood of capturing NA and PA decreased with each EMA protocol day, and affective yield across social contexts differed by participants' depression status. LIMITATIONS: The sample was largely comprised of White young adults. Relative to the remitted and control groups, the sample size for the currently depressed was unbalanced.

conclusionResearchers can optimize compliance and affective yield within EMA by considering depression, time-of-day, study duration, and social context. Clinicians using EMA to monitor affect may benefit from considering these parameters.

Indexed as

DepressionEcological Momentary AssessmentAffectHumansSocial EnvironmentSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultDepressionEcological momentary assessment (EMA)EmotionsSurvey compliance

Identifiers

PMID35537542
PMCPMC10798424
OpenAlexW4229007592

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.