Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40119188›Full record

ArticleBehavior research methods2025

ESM-Q: A consensus-based quality assessment tool for experience sampling method items.

Gudrun Eisele, Anu Hiekkaranta, Yoram K Kunkels, Marije Aan Het Rot, Wouter van Ballegooijen, Sara Laureen Bartels, Jojanneke A Bastiaansen, Patrick N Beymer, Lauren M Bylsma, Ryan W Carpenter and 21 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavior research methods, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. A systematic review of ecological momentary assessment in autism research.Autism : the international journal of research and practice · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. A primer on intensive longitudinal psychometrics.Behavior research methods · 2026
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

31 authors.

Gudrun EiseleDepartment of Neurosciences, Center for Contextual Psychiatry, Campus Gasthuisberg, Herestraat 49 ON5B bus 1029, 3000, Leuven, Belgium. gudrunvera.eisele@kuleuven.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4466-3733
Anu HiekkarantaDepartment of Neurosciences, Center for Contextual Psychiatry, Campus Gasthuisberg, Herestraat 49 ON5B bus 1029, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Yoram K KunkelsFaculty of Medical Sciences, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Marije Aan Het RotFaculty of Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of Psychology (Clinical), University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Wouter van BallegooijenDepartment of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Sara Laureen BartelsDepartment of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology and Alzheimer Centrum Limburg, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Jojanneke A BastiaansenInterdisciplinary Center Psychopathology and Emotion Regulation, Department of Psychiatry, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Patrick N BeymerDepartment of Psychology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA.
Lauren M BylsmaDepartments of Psychiatry and Psychology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Ryan W CarpenterUniversity of Missouri-St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.
William D EllisonDepartment of Psychology, Trinity University, San Antonio, TX, USA.
Aaron J FisherDepartment of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA.
Thomas ForkmannDepartment of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Institute of Psychology, University of Duisburg-Essen, Duisburg, Germany.
Madelyn R FrumkinDepartment of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Daniel FulfordSargent College of Health & Rehabilitation Sciences, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA.
Kristin Naragon-GaineySchool of Psychological Science, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.
Talya GreeneDepartment of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, UK.
Vera E HeiningaFaculty of Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of Pedagogy and Educational Sciences, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Andrew JonesLiverpool John Moores University, Psychology, Liverpool, UK.
Elise K KalokerinosMelbourne School of Psychological Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Peter KuppensResearch Group of Quantitative Psychology and Individual Differences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Kathryn L ModeckiSchool of Psychological Science, Telethon Kids Institute, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.
Fabiola MüllerDepartment of Medical Psychology, Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Andreas B NeubauerInstitute of Psychology, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Vanessa PanaiteResearch and Development Service, James a. Haley Veterans Hospital, Tampa, Florida, USA.
Maude SchneiderFaculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Jessie SunDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Stephen J WilsonDepartment of Psychology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
Caroline Zygar-HoffmannDepartment of Psychology, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Inez Myin-GermeysDepartment of Neurosciences, Center for Contextual Psychiatry, Campus Gasthuisberg, Herestraat 49 ON5B bus 1029, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Olivia J KirtleyDepartment of Neurosciences, Center for Contextual Psychiatry, Campus Gasthuisberg, Herestraat 49 ON5B bus 1029, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.

Funding

Mental Health in Autistic Adults: An RDoC ApproachP50MH130957 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI Carla A Mazefsky · 2022 to 2026
$13.8M
Linking brain network dynamics to imminent smoking lapse risk and behaviorR01DA055774 · NIDA · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY, THE · PI Stephen Jeffrey Wilson · 2022 to 2026
$2.3M
Emotion Regulation in Distress Disorders: Elucidating the Role of Cognitive Processes and Person-Situation Fit in the Laboratory and Daily LifeR01MH118218 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA · PI GAINEY, KRISTIN · 2019 to 2023
$2.2M
Developing a modified brief alcohol-focused intervention tailored for patients with alcohol use disorder in opioid agonist treatmentK23AA029729 · NIAAA · UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME · PI Ryan W Carpenter · 2022 to 2026
$793k
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft NE 2480/1-1Dutch Research Council 406.XS.04.051).Dutch Research Council NWOFonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek 1223725NIBOF iBOF/21/090KU Leuven C14/23/062KU Leuven C16/23/011NIAAA NIH HHS K23 AA029729NIAAA NIH HHS K23 AA029729).NIAAA NIH HHS NIAAANIDA NIH HHS R01 DA055774NIH HHS R01DA055774NIMH NIH HHS P50 MH130957NIMH NIH HHS P50MH130957NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH118218NIMH NIH HHS R01MH118218Research Foundation Flanders 1257821N)Research Foundation Flanders G049023NResearch Foundation Flanders G0F8416NStan Perron Charitable Foundation Partnership Award #0059Stichting tot Steun VCVGZ grant no. 239Western Australian Future Health Research and Innovation Fund DF2022-23/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The experience sampling method (ESM) is increasingly used by researchers from various disciplines to answer novel questions about individuals' daily lives. Measurement best practices have long been overlooked in ESM research, and recent reviews show that item quality is often not reported in ESM studies. The absence of information about item quality may be partly explained by the lack of consensus on how ESM item quality should be evaluated. As part of the ESM Item Repository project (esmitemrepository.com)-an international open science initiative that collects ESM items in an open item bank and evaluates their quality-we brought together 42 international ESM experts to develop an ESM item quality assessment tool. In four Delphi phases, experts suggested 57 item quality criteria, rated the criteria, provided arguments for and against the criteria, and rated the criteria again, considering reflections from other experts. The result of the Delphi process is ESM-Q: a quality assessment tool consisting of 10 core criteria, as well as an additional 15 supplementary criteria, to be used depending on the type of items being rated and the availability of supplementary information. The criteria cover topics ranging from construct validity to the optimal wording of items. ESM-Q can aid ESM researchers in selecting existing ESM items, developing new high-quality ESM items, and evaluating the quality of ESM items in systematic reviews. Expert reflections also highlight open research questions surrounding ESM item design that form a research agenda for ESM measurement.

Indexed as

Research DesignConsensusDelphi TechniqueGuidelines as TopicHumansAmbulatory assessmentDelphi studyEcological momentary assessmentItem quality criteriaQuestionnaire development

Identifiers

PMID40119188
PMCPMC12599268

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.