Dataset Information

Compliance with ecological momentary assessment programmes in the elderly: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) refers to the repeated sampling of information about an individual's symptoms and behaviours, enabling the capture of ecologically meaningful real-time information in a timely manner. Compliance with EMA is critical in determining the validity of an assessment. However, there is limited evidence related to how the elderly comply with EMA programmes or the factors that are associated with compliance.

Design

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Data sources

PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched up to 17 July 2022.

Eligibility criteria

We included observational studies on EMA in the elderly reported in English.

Data extraction and synthesis

Two investigators independently performed screening and data extraction. Discrepancies were resolved by discussion or a third investigator. A systematic review was carried out to characterise the basic characteristics of the participants and EMA programmes. Random-effects meta-analysis was conducted to assess overall compliance and to explore factors associated with differences in compliance among the elderly.

Results

A total of 20 studies with 2047 participants were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. Meta-analysis showed that the combined compliance rate was 86.41% (95% CI: 77.38% to 92.20%; I²=96.4%; p<0.001). Subgroup analysis revealed high levels of heterogeneity in terms of the methods used to assess population classification, assessment method and assessment frequency, although these may not be the sources of heterogeneity. Meta-regression analysis showed that population classification and assessment period might have a significant impact on heterogeneity (p<0.05). Egger's test indicated significant publication bias (p<0.001).

Conclusions

Compliance with EMA programmes is high in the elderly. It is recommended that scholars design reasonable EMA programmes according to the health status of the elderly in the future.

SUBMITTER: Yao L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10347474 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Compliance with ecological momentary assessment programmes in the elderly: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Yao Lin L Yang Yiqun Y Wang Zhi Z Pan Xi X Xu Lan L

BMJ open 20230712 7

<h4>Objective</h4>Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) refers to the repeated sampling of information about an individual's symptoms and behaviours, enabling the capture of ecologically meaningful real-time information in a timely manner. Compliance with EMA is critical in determining the validity of an assessment. However, there is limited evidence related to how the elderly comply with EMA programmes or the factors that are associated with compliance.<h4>Design</h4>Systematic review and meta- ...[more]

PMID: 37438069

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMobile device-based ecological momentary assessment (mobile-EMA) is increasingly used to collect participants' data in real-time and in context. Although EMA offers methodological advantages, these advantages can be diminished by participant noncompliance. However, evidence on how well participants comply with mobile-EMA protocols and how study design factors associated with participant compliance is limited, especially in the youth literature.ObjectiveTo systematically and meta-analytically examine youth's compliance to mobile-EMA protocols and moderators of participant compliance in clinical and nonclinical settings.MethodsStudies using mobile devices to collect EMA data among youth (age ≤18 years old) were identified. A systematic review was conducted to describe the characteristics of mobile-EMA protocols and author-reported factors associated with compliance. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted to estimate the overall compliance across studies and to explore factors associated with differences in youths' compliance.ResultsThis review included 42 unique studies that assessed behaviors, subjective experiences, and contextual information. Mobile phones were used as the primary mode of EMA data collection in 48% (20/42) of the reviewed studies. In total, 12% (5/42) of the studies used wearable devices in addition to the EMA data collection platforms. About half of the studies (62%, 24/42) recruited youth from nonclinical settings. Most (98%, 41/42) studies used a time-based sampling protocol. Among these studies, most (95%, 39/41) prompted youth 2-9 times daily, for a study length ranging from 2-42 days. Sampling frequency and study length did not differ between studies with participants from clinical versus nonclinical settings. Most (88%, 36/41) studies with a time-based sampling protocol defined compliance as the proportion of prompts to which participants responded. In these studies, the weighted average compliance rate was 78.3%. The average compliance rates were not different between studies with clinical (76.9%) and nonclinical (79.2%; P=.29) and studies that used only a mobile-EMA platform (77.4%) and mobile platform plus additional wearable devices (73.0%, P=.36). Among clinical studies, the mean compliance rate was significantly lower in studies that prompted participants 2-3 times (73.5%) or 4-5 times (66.9%) compared with studies with a higher sampling frequency (6+ times: 89.3%). Among nonclinical studies, a higher average compliance rate was observed in studies that prompted participants 2-3 times daily (91.7%) compared with those that prompted participants more frequently (4-5 times: 77.4%; 6+ times: 75.0%). The reported compliance rates did not differ by duration of EMA period among studies from either clinical or nonclinical settings.ConclusionsThe compliance rate among mobile-EMA studies in youth is moderate but suboptimal. Study design may affect protocol compliance differently between clinical and nonclinical participants; including additional wearable devices did not affect participant compliance. A more consistent compliance-related result reporting practices can facilitate understanding and improvement of participant compliance with EMA data collection among youth.

Project description:BackgroundBorderline personality disorder (BPD) is characterized by frequent and intense moment-to-moment changes in affect, behavior, identity, and interpersonal relationships, which typically result in significant and negative deterioration of the person's overall functioning and well-being. Measuring and characterizing the rapidly changing patterns of instability in BPD dysfunction as they occur in a person's daily life can be challenging. Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) is a method that can capture highly dynamic processes in psychopathology research and, thus, is well suited to study intense variability patterns across areas of dysfunction in BPD. EMA studies are characterized by frequent repeated assessments that are delivered to participants in real-life, real-time settings using handheld devices capable of registering responses to short self-report questions in daily life. Compliance in EMA research is defined as the proportion of prompts answered by the participant, considering all planned prompts sent. Low compliance with prompt schedules can compromise the relative advantages of using this method. Despite the growing EMA literature on BPD in recent years, findings regarding study design features that affect compliance with EMA protocols have not been compiled, aggregated, and estimated.ObjectiveThis systematic meta-analytic review aimed to investigate the relationship between study design features and participant compliance in EMA research of BPD.MethodsA systematic review was conducted on November 12, 2021, following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and MOOSE (Meta-analyses of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) guidelines to search for articles featuring EMA studies of BPD that reported compliance rates and included sufficient data to extract relevant design features. For studies with complete data, random-effect models were used to estimate the overall compliance rate and explore its association with design features.ResultsIn total, 28 peer-reviewed EMA studies comprising 2052 participants were included in the study. Design features (sampling strategy, average prompting frequency, number of items, response window, sampling device, financial incentive, and dropout rate) showed a large variability across studies, and many studies did not report design features. The meta-analytic synthesis was restricted to 64% (18/28) of articles and revealed a pooled compliance rate of 79% across studies. We did not find any significant relationship between design features and compliance rates.ConclusionsOur results show wide variability in the design and reporting of EMA studies assessing BPD. Compliance rates appear to be stable across varying setups, and it is likely that standard design features are not directly responsible for improving or diminishing compliance. We discuss possible nonspecific factors of study design that may have an impact on compliance. Given the promise of EMA research in BPD, we also discuss the importance of unifying standards for EMA reporting so that data stemming from this rich literature can be aggregated and interpreted jointly.

Project description:BackgroundMobile ecological momentary assessment (mEMA) permits real-time capture of self-reported participant behaviors and perceptual experiences. Reporting of mEMA protocols and compliance has been identified as problematic within systematic reviews of children, youth, and specific clinical populations of adults.ObjectiveThis study aimed to describe the use of mEMA for self-reported behaviors and psychological constructs, mEMA protocol and compliance reporting, and associations between key components of mEMA protocols and compliance in studies of nonclinical and clinical samples of adults.MethodsIn total, 9 electronic databases were searched (2006-2016) for observational studies reporting compliance to mEMA for health-related data from adults (>18 years) in nonclinical and clinical settings. Screening and data extraction were undertaken by independent reviewers, with discrepancies resolved by consensus. Narrative synthesis described participants, mEMA target, protocol, and compliance. Random effects meta-analysis explored factors associated with cohort compliance (monitoring duration, daily prompt frequency or schedule, device type, training, incentives, and burden score). Random effects analysis of variance (P≤.05) assessed differences between nonclinical and clinical data sets.ResultsOf the 168 eligible studies, 97/105 (57.7%) reported compliance in unique data sets (nonclinical=64/105 [61%], clinical=41/105 [39%]). The most common self-reported mEMA target was affect (primary target: 31/105, 29.5% data sets; secondary target: 50/105, 47.6% data sets). The median duration of the mEMA protocol was 7 days (nonclinical=7, clinical=12). Most protocols used a single time-based (random or interval) prompt type (69/105, 65.7%); median prompt frequency was 5 per day. The median number of items per prompt was similar for nonclinical (8) and clinical data sets (10). More than half of the data sets reported mEMA training (84/105, 80%) and provision of participant incentives (66/105, 62.9%). Less than half of the data sets reported number of prompts delivered (22/105, 21%), answered (43/105, 41%), criterion for valid mEMA data (37/105, 35.2%), or response latency (38/105, 36.2%). Meta-analysis (nonclinical=41, clinical=27) estimated an overall compliance of 81.9% (95% CI 79.1-84.4), with no significant difference between nonclinical and clinical data sets or estimates before or after data exclusions. Compliance was associated with prompts per day and items per prompt for nonclinical data sets. Although widespread heterogeneity existed across analysis (I2>90%), no compelling relationship was identified between key features of mEMA protocols representing burden and mEMA compliance.ConclusionsIn this 10-year sample of studies using the mEMA of self-reported health-related behaviors and psychological constructs in adult nonclinical and clinical populations, mEMA was applied across contexts and health conditions and to collect a range of health-related data. There was inconsistent reporting of compliance and key features within protocols, which limited the ability to confidently identify components of mEMA schedules likely to have a specific impact on compliance.

Project description:BackgroundAdolescence through emerging adulthood represents a critical period associated with changes in lifestyle behaviors. Understanding the dynamic relationships between cognitive, social, and environmental contexts is informative for the development of interventions aiming to help youth sustain physical activity and limit sedentary time during this life stage. Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) is an innovative method involving real-time assessment of individuals' experiences and behaviors in their naturalistic or everyday environments; however, EMA compliance can be problematic due to high participant burdens.ObjectiveThis systematic review synthesized existing evidence pertaining to compliance in EMA studies that investigated wake-time movement behaviors among adolescent and emerging adult populations. Differences in EMA delivery scheme or protocol, EMA platforms, prompting schedules, and compensation methods-all of which can affect participant compliance and overall study quality-were examined.MethodsAn electronic literature search was conducted in PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science databases to select relevant papers that assessed movement behaviors among the population using EMA and reported compliance information for inclusion (n=52) in October 2022. Study quality was assessed using a modified version of the Checklist for Reporting of EMA Studies (CREMAS).ResultsSynthesizing the existing evidence revealed several factors that influence compliance. The platform used for EMA studies could affect compliance and data quality in that studies using smartphones or apps might lessen additional burdens associated with delivering EMAs, yet most studies used web-based formats (n=18, 35%). Study length was not found to affect EMA compliance rates, but the timing and frequency of prompts may be critical factors associated with missingness. For example, studies that only prompted participants once per day had higher compliance (91% vs 77%), but more frequent prompts provided more comprehensive data for researchers at the expense of increased participant burden. Similarly, studies with frequent prompting within the day may provide more representative data but may also be perceived as more burdensome and result in lower compliance. Compensation type did not significantly affect compliance, but additional motivational strategies could be applied to encourage participant response.ConclusionsUltimately, researchers should consider the best strategies to limit burdens, balanced against requirements to answer the research question or phenomena being studied. Findings also highlight the need for greater consistency in reporting and more specificity when explaining procedures to understand how EMA compliance could be optimized in studies examining physical activity and sedentary time among youth.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42021282093; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=282093.

Project description:As mobile devices have become a central part of our daily lives, they are also becoming increasingly important in research. In the medical context, for example, smartphones are used to collect ecologically valid and longitudinal data using Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA), which is mostly implemented through questionnaires delivered via smart notifications. This type of data collection is intended to capture a patient's condition on a moment-to-moment and longer-term basis. To collect more objective and contextual data and to understand patients even better, researchers can not only use patients' input via EMA, but also use sensors as part of the Mobile Crowdsensing (MCS) approach. In this paper, we examine how researchers have embraced the topic of MCS in the context of EMA through a systematic literature review. This PRISMA-guided review is based on the databases PubMed, Web of Science, and EBSCOhost. It is shown through the results that both EMA research in general and the use of sensors in EMA research are steadily increasing. In addition, most of the studies reviewed used mobile apps to deliver EMA to participants, used a fixed-time prompting strategy, and used signal-contingent or interval-contingent self-assessment as sampling/assessment strategies. The most commonly used sensors in EMA studies are the accelerometer and GPS. In most studies, these sensors are used for simple data collection, but sensor data are also commonly used to verify study participant responses and, less commonly, to trigger EMA prompts. Security and privacy aspects are addressed in only a subset of mHealth EMA publications. Moreover, we found that EMA adherence was negatively correlated with the total number of prompts and was higher in studies using a microinteraction-based EMA (μEMA) approach as well as in studies utilizing sensors. Overall, we envision that the potential of the technological capabilities of smartphones and sensors could be better exploited in future, more automated approaches.

Project description:BackgroundNew methods for assessing diet in research are being developed to address the limitations of traditional dietary assessment methods. Mobile device-assisted ecological momentary diet assessment (mEMDA) is a new dietary assessment method that has not yet been optimized and has the potential to minimize recall biases and participant burden while maximizing ecological validity. There have been limited efforts to characterize the use of mEMDA in behavioral research settings.ObjectiveThe aims of this study were to summarize mEMDA protocols used in research to date, to characterize key aspects of these assessment approaches, and to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of mEMDA compared with the traditional dietary assessment methods as well as implications for future mEMDA research.MethodsStudies that used mobile devices and described mEMDA protocols to assess dietary intake were included. Data were extracted according to Preferred Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Cochrane guidelines and then synthesized narratively.ResultsThe review included 20 studies with unique mEMDA protocols. Of these, 50% (10/20) used participant-initiated reports of intake at eating events (event-contingent mEMDA), and 50% (10/20) used researcher-initiated prompts requesting that participants report recent dietary intake (signal-contingent mEMDA). A majority of the study protocols (60%, 12/20) enabled participants to use mobile phones to report dietary data. Event-contingent mEMDA protocols most commonly assessed diet in real time, used dietary records for data collection (60%, 6/10), and provided estimates of energy and nutrient intake (60%, 6/10). All signal-contingent mEMDA protocols used a near real-time recall approach with unannounced (ie, random) abbreviated diet surveys. Most signal-contingent protocols (70%, 7/10) assessed the frequency with which (targeted) foods or food groups were consumed. Relatively few (30%, 6/20) studies compared mEMDA with the traditional dietary assessment methods.ConclusionsThis review demonstrates that mEMDA has the potential to reduce participant burden and recall bias, thus advancing the field beyond current dietary assessment methods while maximizing ecological validity.

Dataset Information

Compliance with ecological momentary assessment programmes in the elderly: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objective

Design

Data sources

Eligibility criteria

Data extraction and synthesis

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Compliance with ecological momentary assessment programmes in the elderly: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets