SynthesisApplied psychology. Health and well-being2025
Positive changes in daily life? A meta-analysis of positive psychological ecological momentary interventions.
Synthesis in Applied psychology. Health and well-being, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Positive changes in daily life? A meta-analysis of positive psychological ecological momentary interventions.Applied psychology. Health and well-being · 2025Pooled it
- A psycho-ecological signal recognition framework for user behavior prediction on digital media platforms.PloS one · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Positive psychological interventions (PPI) hold promise for boosting well-being and quality of life in diverse populations, but not much is known about their efficacy as ecological momentary interventions (EMIs, e.g. via mobile applications) in daily life. This meta-analysis uses random-effects models to examine the efficacy of PPI-EMIs compared to control groups (active or passive) and exploring study region, age, gender, and risk of bias as moderators. Overall, 16 studies were included (N = 3397, 69.1% female, M
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.