ArticleJMIR research protocols2025
Development and Validation of a Cross-Device Platform for Anhedonia Trend Visualization by Using Ecological Momentary Assessment and Moving Averages (Part I): Protocol for a Methodological Pilot Study.
Article in JMIR research protocols, 2025. 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
backgroundAnhedonia is a core symptom of depressive disorders. Although group-level cutoff points for the Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale (SHAPS) are established, real-time, individual-level monitoring remains limited. Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) enables high-frequency sampling, and simple moving averages (SMA; 7/14/30 days) offer an interpretable way to smooth daily signals and surface early-warning trends.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to develop and validate a cross-device platform that collects EMA-based SHAPS responses and visualizes SMA trends for individual anhedonia monitoring. This part I protocol focuses on platform design, feasibility, usability, data quality, and initial analytical validity to inform subsequent evaluation.
methodsWe will conduct a single-arm methodological pilot in approximately 24 adults, recruited from an outpatient psychiatry clinic (clinical cohort) and a university setting (nonclinical cohort). After baseline assessment, participants will complete 30 days of daily EMA-SHAPS. Primary outcomes are feasibility (adherence, missingness patterns, timing fidelity) and usability/face validity (eg, System Usability Scale, qualitative feedback). We will also describe expert content validity ratings for key visual elements and exploratory analytic checks of within-person variability and the descriptive behavior of 7/14/30-day moving averages; these analyses are not powered for confirmatory hypothesis testing.
resultsThis protocol specifies the design-validate sequence, recruitment procedures, and predefined adherence and missing-data rules for computing moving averages. Recruitment for the year-1 feasibility pilot is scheduled to begin in March 2026 following institutional review board approval (approval 114006; approval date: June 10, 2025), with feasibility metrics, usability indices, and parameter estimates used to refine alert logic and power calculations for a planned part II evaluation.
conclusionsCombining EMA-SHAPS with SMA-based trend visualizations may provide an interpretable way to summarize daily anhedonia signals and generate candidate early-warning indicators. This methodological pilot will deliver feasibility, usability, and preliminary analytic parameters needed to support a subsequent controlled evaluation of the platform's clinical utility. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/84024.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.