ArticleDrug and alcohol dependence reports2025
A mixed-methods investigation of an ecological momentary assessment protocol for cigarette-smoking youth: Psychometric properties and participant experiences.
Article in Drug and alcohol dependence reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) is popular in smoking research to study time-varying processes and design just-in-time personalised cessation interventions. Yet, research examining the psychometric properties of EMA and user experiences with EMA protocols is lacking. We conducted a mixed-methods study to test the EMA component of a mobile intervention for middle to late-aged adolescents (16-20 years) who smoke cigarettes at least weekly. Method: Participants ( Results: The EMA questionnaires showed good convergent validity and reliability. The average compliance rate was 77 %, and generally, participants evaluated the experience positively. While most participants rated the timing and frequency of EMA positively, some participants did not like that assessments expired after 1.5 h. Forty percent of participants also reported that they liked monitoring their smoking and mood. Conclusions: The use of EMA in our target group is feasible and had good compliance. The items used are suitable for researchers to use in future studies. We urge researchers to test the psychometric quality and feasibility of new EMA protocols before using them in confirmatory research.
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.