Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37606276›Full record

SynthesisSchizophrenia bulletin2024

Methodological Characteristics and Feasibility of Ecological Momentary Assessment Studies in Psychosis: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Imogen H Bell, Emily Eisner, Stephanie Allan, Sharla Cartner, John Torous, Sandra Bucci, Neil Thomas

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Schizophrenia bulletin, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
9.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Polygenic risk meets early trauma: toward a neuropsychodevelopmental model of schizophrenia.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Imogen H BellOrygen The National Centre of Excellence in Youth Mental Health, Parkville, VIC, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7567-0517
Emily EisnerDivision of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Zochonis Building, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Stephanie AllanUniversity of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Sharla CartnerCentre for Mental Health, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
John TorousDepartment of Psychiatry, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5362-7937
Sandra BucciDivision of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Zochonis Building, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Neil ThomasCentre for Mental Health, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7006-6361
Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust · GBSwinburne University of Technology · AUBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center · USThe University of Melbourne · AUUniversity of Glasgow · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEcological momentary assessment (EMA) involves completing multiple surveys over time in daily life, capturing in-the-moment experiences in real-world contexts. EMA use in psychosis studies has surged over several decades. To critically examine EMA use in psychosis research and assist future researchers in designing new EMA studies, this systematic review aimed to summarize the methodological approaches used for positive symptoms in psychosis populations and evaluate feasibility with a focus on completion rates.

methodsA systematic review of PubMed, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Web of Science, EBSCOhost, and Embase databases using search terms related to EMA and psychosis was conducted. Excluding duplicate samples, a meta-analysis was conducted of EMA survey completion rates and meta-regression to examine predictors of completion.

resultsSixty-eight studies were included in the review. Characteristics and reporting of EMA methodologies were variable across studies. The meta-mean EMA survey completion computed from the 39 unique studies that reported a mean completion rate was 67.15% (95% CI = 62.3, 71.9), with an average of 86.25% of the sample meeting a one-third EMA completion criterion. No significant predictors of completion were found in the meta-regression. A variety of EMA items were used to measure psychotic experiences, of which few were validated.

conclusionsEMA methods have been widely applied in psychosis studies using a range of protocols. Completion rates are high, providing clear evidence of feasibility in psychosis populations. Recommendations for reporting in future studies are provided.

Indexed as

Ecological Momentary AssessmentPsychotic DisordersFeasibility StudiesHumansResearch DesignSurveys and Questionnairesecological momentary assessmentExperience sampling methodologypsychosisschizophrenia

Identifiers

PMID37606276
PMCPMC10919779
OpenAlexW4386047017

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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 Socratic graph.