Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42045337›Full record

ArticleNPP - digital psychiatry and neuroscience2026

Adherence to ecological momentary assessment studies in children and adolescents with psychopathology: A systematic review with meta-analysis.

Lauren M Henry, Urmi Pandya, Eleanor Malone, Caroline Miller, Savana Agyemang, Elizabeth Tandilashvili, Kolin Lewis, Clara E Haeffner, Kyunghun Lee, Alicia A Livinski and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NPP - digital psychiatry and neuroscience, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

15 authors.

Lauren M HenryEmotion and Development Branch, National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), Bethesda, MD, USA. Lauren.Henry@nih.gov.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0286-9319
Urmi PandyaEmotion and Development Branch, National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), Bethesda, MD, USA.
Eleanor MaloneEmotion and Development Branch, National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), Bethesda, MD, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0006-3286-5481
Caroline MillerEmotion and Development Branch, National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), Bethesda, MD, USA.
Savana AgyemangEmotion and Development Branch, National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), Bethesda, MD, USA.
Elizabeth TandilashviliEmotion and Development Branch, National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), Bethesda, MD, USA.
Kolin LewisEmotion and Development Branch, National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), Bethesda, MD, USA.
Clara E HaeffnerEmotion and Development Branch, National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), Bethesda, MD, USA.
Kyunghun LeeEmotion and Development Branch, National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), Bethesda, MD, USA.
Alicia A LivinskiNational Institutes of Health Library, Office of Research Services, Office of the Director, NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Miryam KidermanEmotion and Development Branch, National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), Bethesda, MD, USA.
Reut NaimThe School of Psychological Sciences, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel.
Olivia MetcalfPhoenix Australia, Department of Psychiatry, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Silvia Lopez-GuzmanEmotion and Development Branch, National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), Bethesda, MD, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0271-3576
Melissa A BrotmanEmotion and Development Branch, National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), Bethesda, MD, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9859-4702

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) is a tool facilitating the repeated collection of real-time data in naturalistic settings that can be applied to clinical research. Despite established methodological strengths, EMA protocols may be burdensome for participants, potentially leading to problems with adherence. Existing meta-analytic evidence is insufficient to inform the decision making of clinical researchers in using EMA in their work. In the current registered report, we address this need by conducting a systematic review with meta-analysis (1) examining adherence (enrollment, dropout, and compliance) in children and adolescents with psychological disorders and symptoms and (2) identifying aspects of study design that maximize adherence. In January 2023, we searched five databases for empirical EMA studies of youth (8-17 years) with psychological symptoms/diagnoses with data on adherence. We extracted data, assessed study quality, and conducted meta-analyses using random-effects models. We included 130 studies with 14,400 participants. On average, surveys contained 15 items, took over 3 min to complete, and incorporated surveys with multiple response scale types delivered using smartphones/cell phones provided to participants. Meta-analyses revealed that study enrollment was moderate to high (82% in youth with psychopathology, 67% in community youth) and dropout prior to starting EMA protocols was low (<1-2%). Dropout during EMA protocols was 12% for youth with psychopathology and 8% for community youth, underscoring the importance of maintaining participant engagement throughout EMA studies. Compliance approximated the 80% field benchmark for healthy youth but was lower for youth from the community and with psychopathology. Participant characteristics (e.g., younger age) and design factors (e.g., incentive-based compensation) were associated with greater compliance in certain groups. Despite limitations (missing data, methodological constraints), findings have important implications for researchers developing and conducting pediatric EMA protocols. The stage 1 protocol for this Registered Report was accepted in principle on April 19, 2024. The protocol, as accepted by the journal, can be found at: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.25732482.v1 . This research was supported by the Intramural Research Program (IRP) of the NIMH and the NIH Library's and Office of Research Service's support of the NIH IRP.

Identifiers

PMID42045337
PMCPMC13121683

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.