ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2025
Opening the contextual black box: a case for idiographic experience sampling of context for clinical applications.
Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2025. 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.
- Experience sampling methods require more than numbers.Communications psychology · 2026Review
- Exploring reactivity effects of self-monitoring prolonged grief reactions in daily life: A randomized waitlist-controlled trial using experience sampling methodology.Internet interventions · 2025Article
- An experience sampling study exploring associations between contextual factors and prolonged grief reactions in daily life.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Rumination as a within-person indirect pathway between daily negative life events and suicidal ideation in recently hospitalized adults.Journal of psychiatric research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The experience sampling method (ESM) is increasingly used as a clinical tool in mental health care. Currently, ESM studies pay relatively little attention to assessing contextual factors, such as a person's experience and perception of events, activities, and social interactions. This has been referred to as the 'contextual black box'. However, personalized context information is essential for applications in clinical settings to gain insight in triggering and maintaining factors of psychopathology. Typically, ESM context items are designed for nomothetic research questions, to capture broad factors that are shared across individuals, such as 'unpleasant events'. We provide an overview of such nomothetic items. We argue that these items have limited clinical utility and describe idiographic alternatives to ESM context assessment to obtain more specific and personalized information about individual clients. Specifically, we present three existing idiographic ESM techniques to context assessment with clinical potential. First, we illustrate open-ended ESM items that prompt clients to fill in text, such as a description of a specific unpleasant event they experienced. Second, we describe personalized response options and self-learning items that ask clients to define personally relevant response categories, such as types of events the client finds unpleasant. Third, we describe personalized ESM items that client and clinician select or formulate together for concepts of interest. We discuss the advantages and disadvantages of these idiographic techniques. Additionally, we suggest future directions for clinical research aiming to address the 'contextual black box' and enhance the potential of ESM in mental health care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39602019What 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.