ArticleScientific reports2026
Development and validation of single-item experience sampling measures of wellbeing in teens.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
What are you feeling right now? Were you aware of where your mind was a moment ago? Questions like these provide simple, face valid measures of momentary experience. Ultra-brief measures using the experience sampling method (ESM), consisting of a few items that can be completed in about a minute, may also be highly scalable and increase engagement in applied contexts. We developed single-item measures of teen wellbeing using ESM in four domains: awareness, connection, insight, and purpose. Then, we evaluated item relevance and clarity through user testing with 12 teens aged 14-18 years old and made revisions based on their feedback. Finally, we tested the new items in the context of ESM with 156 teens aged 13-18 years old, over a period of 8 days with ESM questions sent via text message three times each day outside school hours. We found one or more items for each domain with acceptable validity, response variability, and a normal response distribution. We assessed convergent, divergent, and predictive validity, and found significant relationships for comparison measures of each type. Future research should further investigate using these measures in the context of interventions that include training in these skills-based domains.
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.