ArticleAnnals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine2023
Introducing a Real-Time Method for Identifying the Predictors of Noncompliance with Event-Based Reporting of Tobacco Use in Ecological Momentary Assessment.
Article in Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Longitudinal User Engagement with Microinteraction Ecological Momentary Assessment (μEMA).Proceedings of the ACM on interactive, mobile, wearable and ubiquitous technologies · 2025Article
- A research agenda to advance the study of implementation mechanisms.Implementation science communications · 2024Article
- The underrepresentation of racial/ethnic minorities in research on co-use of nicotine, alcohol, and/or cannabis via ecological momentary assessment methods: A narrative review.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLittle is known about the factors that bias event-based (i.e., self-initiated) reporting of health behaviors in ecological momentary assessment (EMA) due to the difficulty inherent to tracking failures to self-initiate reports. PURPOSE: To introduce a real-time method for identifying the predictors of noncompliance with event-based reporting.
methodsN = 410 adults who used both cigarettes and e-cigarettes completed a 1-week EMA protocol that combined random reporting of current contexts with event-based reporting of tobacco use. Each random assessment first asked if participants were currently using tobacco and, if so, the assessment converted into a "randomly captured" event report-indicating failure to self-initiate that report. Multilevel modeling tested predictors of failing to complete random reports and failing to self-initiate event reports.
resultsOn the person level, male sex, higher average cigarette rate, and higher average cigarette urge each predicted missing random reports. The person-level predictors of failing to self-initiate event reports were older age, higher average cigarette and e-cigarette rates, higher average cigarette urge, and being alone more on average; the moment-level predictors were lower cigarette urge, lower positive affect, alcohol use, and cannabis use. Strikingly, the randomly captured events comprised more of the total EMA reports (28%) than did the self-initiated event reports (24%). These report types were similar across most variables, with some exceptions, such as momentary cannabis use predicting the random capture of tobacco events.
conclusionsThis study demonstrated a method of identifying predictors of noncompliance with event-based reporting of tobacco use and enhancing the real-time capture of events.
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.