Dataset Information

Systematic review of ecological momentary assessment (EMA) studies of five public health-related behaviours: review protocol.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) involves repeated, real-time assessments of phenomena (eg, cognitions, emotions, behaviours) over a period of time in naturalistic settings. EMA is increasingly used to study both within-person and between-person processes. We will review EMA studies investigating key health behaviours and synthesise: (1) study characteristics (eg, frequency of assessments, adherence, incentives), (2) associations between psychological predictors and behaviours and (3) moderators of adherence to EMA protocols.

Methods and analysis

This review will focus on EMA studies conducted across five public health behaviours in adult, non-clinical populations: movement behaviour (including physical activity and sedentary behaviour), dietary behaviour, alcohol consumption, tobacco smoking and preventive sexual health behaviours. Studies need to have assessed at least one psychological or contextual predictor of these behaviours. Studies reporting exclusively on physiological outcomes (eg, cortisol) or those not conducted under free-living conditions will be excluded. We will search OVID MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and Web of Science using terms relevant to EMA and the selected health behaviours. Reference lists of existing systematic reviews of EMA studies will be hand searched. Identified articles will be screened by two reviewers. This review is expected to provide a comprehensive summary of EMA studies assessing psychological or contextual predictors of five public health behaviours.

Ethics and dissemination

The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and presentations. Data from included studies will be made available to other researchers. No ethics are required.

Prospero registration number

CRD42020168314.

SUBMITTER: Kwasnicka D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8287614 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Digital interventions often suffer from low usage, which may reflect insufficient attention to user experience. Moreover, the existing evaluation methods have limited applicability in the remote study of user experience of complex interventions that have expansive content and that are used over an extensive period of time. To alleviate these challenges, we describe here a novel qualitative Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) method: the CORTO method (Contextual, One-item, Repeated, Timely, Open-ended). We used it to gather digital intervention user experience data from Finnish adults (n = 184) who lived with interview-confirmed major depressive disorder (MDD) and took part in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) that studied the efficacy of a novel 12-week game-based digital intervention for depression. A second dataset on user experience was gathered with retrospective interviews (n = 22). We inductively coded the CORTO method and retrospective interview data, which led to four user experience categories: (1) contextual use, (2) interaction-elicited emotional experience, (3) usability, and (4) technical issues. Then, we used the created user experience categories and Template Analysis to analyze both datasets together, and reported the results qualitatively. Finally, we compared the two datasets with each other. We found that the data generated with the CORTO method offered more insights into usability and technical categories than the interview data that particularly illustrated the contextual use. The emotional valence of the interview data was more positive compared with the CORTO data. Both the CORTO and interview data detected 55 % of the micro-level categories; 20 % of micro-level categories were only detected by the CORTO data and 25 % only by the interview data. We found that the during-intervention user experience measurement with the CORTO method can provide intervention-specific insights, and thereby further the iterative user-centered intervention development. Overall, these findings highlight the impact of evaluation methods on the categories and qualities of insights acquired in intervention research.

Project description:BackgroundHealthy behaviors are crucial for maintaining a person's health and well-being. The effects of health behavior interventions are mediated by individual and contextual factors that vary over time. Recently emerging smartphone-based ecological momentary interventions (EMIs) can use real-time user reports (ecological momentary assessments [EMAs]) to trigger appropriate support when needed in daily life.ObjectiveThis systematic review aims to assess the characteristics of smartphone-delivered EMIs using self-reported EMAs in relation to their effects on health behaviors, user engagement, and user perspectives.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL in June 2019 and updated the search in March 2020. We included experimental studies that incorporated EMIs based on EMAs delivered through smartphone apps to promote health behaviors in any health domain. Studies were independently screened. The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines were followed. We performed a narrative synthesis of intervention effects, user perspectives and engagement, and intervention design and characteristics. Quality appraisal was conducted for all included studies.ResultsWe included 19 papers describing 17 unique studies and comprising 652 participants. Most studies were quasi-experimental (13/17, 76%), had small sample sizes, and great heterogeneity in intervention designs and measurements. EMIs were most popular in the mental health domain (8/17, 47%), followed by substance abuse (3/17, 18%), diet, weight loss, physical activity (4/17, 24%), and smoking (2/17, 12%). Of the 17 studies, the 4 (24%) included randomized controlled trials reported nonstatistically significant effects on health behaviors, and 4 (24%) quasi-experimental studies reported statistically significant pre-post improvements in self-reported primary outcomes, namely depressive (P<.001) and psychotic symptoms (P=.03), drinking frequency (P<.001), and eating patterns (P=.01). EMA was commonly used to capture subjective experiences as well as behaviors, whereas sensors were rarely used. Generally, users perceived EMIs to be helpful. Common suggestions for improvement included enhancing personalization, multimedia and interactive capabilities (eg, voice recording), and lowering the EMA reporting burden. EMI and EMA components were rarely reported and were not described in a standardized manner across studies, hampering progress in this field. A reporting checklist was developed to facilitate the interpretation and comparison of findings and enhance the transparency and replicability of future studies using EMAs and EMIs.ConclusionsThe use of smartphone-delivered EMIs using self-reported EMAs to promote behavior change is an emerging area of research, with few studies evaluating efficacy. Such interventions could present an opportunity to enhance health but need further assessment in larger participant cohorts and well-designed evaluations following reporting checklists. Future research should explore combining self-reported EMAs of subjective experiences with objective data passively collected via sensors to promote personalization while minimizing user burden, as well as explore different EMA data collection methods (eg, chatbots).Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42019138739; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=138739.

Project description:BackgroundEcological momentary assessment (EMA) is an in situ method of gathering self-report on behaviors using mobile devices. In typical phone-based EMAs, participants are prompted repeatedly with multiple-choice questions, often causing participation burden. Alternatively, microinteraction EMA (micro-EMA or μEMA) is a type of EMA where all the self-report prompts are single-question surveys that can be answered using a 1-tap glanceable microinteraction conveniently on a smartwatch. Prior work suggests that μEMA may permit a substantially higher prompting rate than EMA, yielding higher response rates and lower participation burden. This is achieved by ensuring μEMA prompt questions are quick and cognitively simple to answer. However, the validity of participant responses from μEMA self-report has not yet been formally assessed.ObjectiveIn this pilot study, we explored the criterion validity of μEMA self-report on a smartwatch, using physical activity (PA) assessment as an example behavior of interest.MethodsA total of 17 participants answered 72 μEMA prompts each day for 1 week using a custom-built μEMA smartwatch app. At each prompt, they self-reported whether they were doing sedentary, light/standing, moderate/walking, or vigorous activities by tapping on the smartwatch screen. Responses were compared with a research-grade activity monitor worn on the dominant ankle simultaneously (and continuously) measuring PA.ResultsParticipants had an 87.01% (5226/6006) μEMA completion rate and a 74.00% (5226/7062) compliance rate taking an average of only 5.4 (SD 1.5) seconds to answer a prompt. When comparing μEMA responses with the activity monitor, we observed significantly higher (P<.001) momentary PA levels on the activity monitor when participants self-reported engaging in moderate+vigorous activities compared with sedentary or light/standing activities. The same comparison did not yield any significant differences in momentary PA levels as recorded by the activity monitor when the μEMA responses were randomly generated (ie, simulating careless taps on the smartwatch).ConclusionsFor PA measurement, high-frequency μEMA self-report could be used to capture information that appears consistent with that of a research-grade continuous sensor for sedentary, light, and moderate+vigorous activity, suggesting criterion validity. The preliminary results show that participants were not carelessly answering μEMA prompts by randomly tapping on the smartwatch but were reporting their true behavior at that moment. However, more research is needed to examine the criterion validity of μEMA when measuring vigorous activities.