MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2913090945 · doi:10.2196/11215

Methodological Strategies for Ecological Momentary Assessment to Evaluate Mood and Stress in Adult Patients Using Mobile Phones: Systematic Review

2019· review· en· W2913090945 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yong Yang, Gi Wook Ryu, Mona Choi

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Research Topics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Research Foundation of KoreaNational Research Foundation
KeywordsMoodmHealthPsychologyMobile phoneEcologyMedicineComputer scienceClinical psychologyApplied psychologyPsychological interventionPsychiatryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) has utility for measuring psychological properties in daily life. EMA has also allowed researchers to collect data on diverse experiences and symptoms from various subjects. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to review methodological strategies and useful related information for EMA using mobile phones to capture changes of mood and stress in adult patients seeking health care. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Embase, the Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, and Web of Science. This review included studies published in peer-reviewed journals in English between January 2008 and November 2017 that used basic- or advanced-feature mobile phones to measure momentary mood or stress in adult patients seeking health care in outpatient departments. We excluded studies of smoking and substance addictions and studies of mental disorder patients who had been diagnosed by physicians. RESULTS: We reviewed 12 selected articles that used EMA via mobile phones to measure momentary mood and stress and other related variables from various patients with chronic fatigue syndrome, breast cancer, migraine, HIV, tinnitus, temporomandibular disorder, end-stage kidney disease, and traumatic brain injury. Most of the selected studies (11/12, 92%) used signal contingency and in 8 of the 12 studies (67%) alarms were sent at random or semirandom intervals to prompt the momentary measurement. Out of 12 studies, 7 (58%) used specific apps directly installed on mobile phones, 3 (25%) used mobile phones to link to Web-based survey programs, and 2 (17%) used an interactive voice-response system. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides researchers with useful information regarding methodological details for utilizing EMA to measure mood and stress in adult patients. This review shows that EMA methods could be effective and reasonable for measuring momentary mood and stress, given that basic- and advanced-feature mobile phones are ubiquitous, familiar, and easy to approach. Therefore, researchers could adopt and utilize EMA methods using mobile phones to measure psychological health outcomes, such as mood and stress, in adult patients.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.544
GPT teacher head0.639
Teacher spread0.096 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations89
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicMental Health Research TopicsFrench-language works237,207