SynthesisJournal of clinical psychology2026
A Systematic Review of Ecological Momentary Assessment for Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder.
Synthesis in Journal of clinical psychology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is characterized by its symptomatology heterogeneity, which poses challenges for its assessment and treatment. Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) has been proposed as a promising method for gathering information and may offer advantages over retrospective methods. The present study aims to conduct a systematic review of the use of EMA in OCD, examining the main variables assessed, methodological considerations, and the advantages of EMA compared with retrospective measures to assess OCD. The systematic search was conducted using databases including Scopus, Pubmed, Web of Science, PsycNET, and Cochrane Library. Of the identified studies, 28 met the inclusion criteria. These studies focused on the assessment of obsessions, compulsions, experiential avoidance, and sleep, with compulsions being the most studied variable. The studies reveal diverse EMA methods, with traditional paper recordings and smartphones differing in frequency and duration of the records. Some studies reported that EMA may serve as a valid and sensitive tool for detecting changes in OCD and overcome some limitations of retrospective assessments. Despite the potential of EMA, their validity is still questionable, and their application during intervention processes is limited, particularly given the heterogeneity of the available evidence and the limited application of EMA during intervention processes. Further research is essential to enhance their integration in clinical settings.
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.