ArticleJournal of psychiatric research2026
Balancing burden and resolution: Effects of EMA survey schedule on compliance and study evaluation in suicide-focused research.
Article in Journal of psychiatric research, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
INTRODUCTION/
backgroundEcological momentary assessment (EMA) enables fine-grained, real-time prediction and monitoring of suicidal ideation and related experiences, but participant burden and declining compliance pose challenges. This study examined how EMA survey schedules influence EMA compliance, response likelihood, and participant burden.
methodsParticipants (N = 137) with recent suicidal ideation completed 28 days of EMA under one of three schedules: fixed (six surveys/day), 4+burst (four/day with one week of 10/day), or randomly varying (3-15 surveys/day). Bayesian mixed-effects and logistic regression models examined the effects of schedule type and time on overall and momentary compliance. Associations between compliance and schedule type with perceived burden, emotional reactions, and satisfaction were examined.
resultsSchedule type was not associated with overall compliance; however, time-by-schedule interactions showed that 4+burst and randomly varying conditions exhibited less decline over time than the fixed condition. Prior survey completion increased momentary response likelihood, while time in study decreased the likelihood of responding. Higher compliance was associated with fewer perceived drawbacks; no other effects of compliance or study schedule were found. DISCUSSION: Although overall compliance did not differ across schedules, those that incorporated some variability in survey frequency showed more sustained compliance over time. Responding to the previous survey increased response likelihood, indicating a momentum effect, whereas longer study participation reduced momentary compliance, consistent with cumulative survey fatigue.
conclusionIncorporating variability in survey frequency sustained greater compliance over time without increasing perceived burden, suggesting that varying EMA schedules may help mitigate study fatigue.
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.