ReviewDigital health
Ecological momentary assessment for symptom monitoring among people with knee osteoarthritis: A scoping review.
Review in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In recent years, the number of individuals with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) receiving home-based conservative management has increased. These individuals often experience multiple symptoms that impair daily functioning, highlighting the need for remote monitoring. Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) enables repeated, real-time monitoring of symptoms, activities, and environmental factors in natural settings. However, specific scenarios for applying EMA to assess KOA-related symptoms, together with acceptability and operational feasibility among patients in clinical practice, lack systematic evidence; therefore, the practical value of EMA requires further clarification. Objective: This study aims to systematically synthesize evidence on the feasibility and clinical value of EMA for evaluating and dynamically monitoring symptoms in patients with KOA. Based on this synthesis, the challenges, emerging opportunities, and future research directions for EMA applications in KOA are further identified. Methods: Following the Arksey and O'Malley framework and the PRISMA-ScR checklist, nine databases were systematically searched from inception to June 2025. After the screening process, relevant data were extracted from all studies that met the inclusion criteria. Results: A total of 24 studies were included. This review systematically summarized and analyzed study design characteristics, EMA data collection methods, response-related outcomes, and the main findings. Several gaps were identified. Sample size, follow-up duration, and data collection frequency varied substantially across studies. In addition, all included studies were limited to the assessment phase, with no translation of EMA use into actual symptom management for patients. Conclusion: EMA is a feasible and valuable approach for evaluating symptoms in patients with KOA. Future studies should establish standardized data collection standards, optimize data collection tools, and further integrate EMA into symptom intervention and management to advance personalized, precision-based care.
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.