ArticleInternational journal of behavioral medicine2026
Use of Ecological Momentary Assessment to Measure Affect-Based Feeling States Among Rural Breast Cancer Survivors: A Feasibility Study Guided by the Integrated Screening Action Model.
Article in International journal of behavioral medicine, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe integrated screening action model (I-SAM) posits sources of automatic motivation (e.g., affect-based feeling states like worry, distress) are important predictors of cancer screening engagement. Yet no prior studies demonstrate how these feeling states change across survivorship and relate to screening behavior. This study tested the feasibility and acceptability of collecting longitudinal data on affect-based feeling states among rural breast cancer survivors using a smartphone-based ecological momentary assessment (EMA) platform.
methodsThe study recruited survivors of stage 0-3 breast cancer who recently completed breast cancer treatment at a large, rural academic cancer center. Participants received each of three, 30-day EMA assessment schedules of varied intensity in a randomly assigned order via smartphone app. Participants received 12-18 notification-contingent EMAs each month and were asked to complete an event-contingent EMA each day they attended a medical appointment. Feasibility measures included study recruitment, enrollment, and retention rates. We assessed EMA completion rates and acceptability scores for each schedule and concordance of event-contingent EMAs with verified medical encounters.
resultsMean age of the 65 enrolled participants was 59 years (range: 36-77). Participants were majority white, non-Hispanic, and 65% lived in a rural area. Fifty-two participants were retained at 3-months. Mean EMA completion rates were 73.7%, 71.7%, 71.7% for the low, medium, and high intensity EMA schedules, respectively. Event-contingent EMA concordance was 53.2%. All schedules achieved a priori benchmarks for acceptability.
conclusionsIt was feasible to recruit and retain rural breast cancer survivors for this research and acceptability ratings were strong for the three EMA sampling intensities evaluated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41145781What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.