ArticleEarly intervention in psychiatry2026
Mobile Technology for Real-Life Assessment of Positive and Negative Symptoms as well as Stress Among Individuals With Early Psychosis: A Scoping Review.
Article in Early intervention in psychiatry, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimThis scoping review aimed to systematically provide an overview of existing findings on the use of ecological momentary assessment (EMA) and related mobile sensing to assess positive and negative symptoms, as well as stress, in individuals at clinical high risk for psychosis (CHR-P) and those with first-episode psychosis (FEP).
methodsFollowing the PRISMA-ScR guidelines, PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science were searched for empirical studies published up to October 2025. Eligible studies assessed positive and negative symptoms and stress in daily life using EMA or related mobile sensing implemented on contemporary devices. Data were extracted on study characteristics, EMA design (sampling schedule, prompting logic, duration, completion rates), and domains assessed and were summarised descriptively.
resultsTen studies (14 records) met the inclusion criteria. Most used smartphone-based EMA with semi-random prompts 4-10 times daily over 6-28 days. Six assessed positive symptoms, three negative symptoms and two stress. Symptoms were all assessed through self-report EMA, while stress was assessed through self-report EMA in one study and objectively through skin conductance in one. The reporting of completion, item validity, and incentive structure was inconsistent, limiting comparability across studies.
conclusionsSelf-report EMA offers a feasible method for real-world assessment of symptoms and stress; however, mobile sensing remains underutilised. IMPLICATIONS: Future research should integrate EMA and related mobile sensing, employ validated indicators and standardise reporting practises to enhance methodological transparency and clinical utility.
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.