ArticleJournal of affective disorders2025
Evaluating psychometric validity of ecological momentary assessment for youth irritability.
Article in Journal of affective disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Psychometric Evaluation of Ecological Momentary Assessment Items for Mood in a Non-Clinical Sample.Brain and behavior · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIrritability is a transdiagnostic symptom in youth, leading to long-term adverse consequences. Ecological momentary assessment (EMA), or naturalistic clinical phenotyping, can quantify real-world experiences and affective dynamics of irritability in vivo and may be less contaminated by biases that impact retrospective report measures. However, to date, no research examines the psychometric properties of EMA measures of irritability.
methodsThe current study assesses EMA data from N = 49 youth receiving treatment for clinically impairing irritability (Mage = 10.63, 36.73 % female). Analyses evaluate two irritability EMA items and one positive-affect EMA item for within and between person variability, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and convergent and discriminant validity.
resultsEMA items demonstrate acceptable psychometric properties including acceptable variability, consistency, reliability, and convergent and discriminant validity. Comparisons to previous work in anxious and healthy youth are discussed. LIMITATIONS: Study limitations include participants' concurrent involvement in treatment and exclusion of outburst-related EMA measures from study analyses.
conclusionThese results may facilitate future research with irritability EMA items in clinical populations; future work should validate EMA items psychometrically before use in clinical trials.
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.