ArticlePsychological medicine2025
Optimizing the frequency of ecological momentary assessments using signal processing.
Article in Psychological medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychometric properties and validity of a Mobile Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (MPHQ-9) for ecological momentary assessment in depressed adults.Psychological assessment · 2026Article
- Re-engineering the disordered mind: clinical experimentation, dynamical systems, and AI for personalized psychiatry.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2026Review
- AI for mental health: clinician expectations and priorities in computational psychiatry.BMC psychiatry · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEcological momentary assessment (EMA) is increasingly recognized as a vital tool for tracking the fluctuating nature of mental states and symptoms in psychiatric research. However, determining the optimal sampling rate - that is, deciding how often participants should be queried to report their symptoms - remains a significant challenge. To address this issue, our study utilizes the Nyquist-Shannon theorem from signal processing, which establishes that any sampling rate more than twice the highest frequency component of a signal is adequate.
methodsWe applied the Nyquist-Shannon theorem to analyze two EMA datasets on depressive symptoms, encompassing a combined total of 35,452 data points collected over periods ranging from 30 to 90 days per individual.
resultsOur analysis of both datasets suggests that the most effective sampling strategy involves measurements at least every other week. We find that measurements at higher frequencies provide valuable and consistent information across both datasets, with significant peaks at weekly and daily intervals.
conclusionsIdeal frequency for measurements remains largely consistent, regardless of the specific symptoms used to estimate depression severity. For conditions in which abrupt or transient symptom dynamics are expected, such as during treatment, more frequent data collection is recommended. However, for regular monitoring, weekly assessments of depressive symptoms may be sufficient. We discuss the implications of our findings for EMA study optimization, address our study's limitations, and outline directions for future 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.