scholarly journals Ecological Momentary Assessment: A Meta-Analysis on Designs, Samples, and Compliance Across Research Fields

Assessment ◽  
2022 ◽  
pp. 107319112110675
Author(s):  
Cornelia Wrzus ◽  
Andreas B. Neubauer

Ecological Momentary Assessments (i.e., EMA, repeated assessments in daily life) are widespread in many fields of psychology and related disciplines. Yet, little knowledge exists on how differences in study designs and samples predict study compliance and dropout—two central parameters of data quality in (micro-)longitudinal research. The current meta-analysis included k = 477 articles (496 samples, total N = 677,536). For each article, we coded the design, sample characteristics, compliance, and dropout rate. The results showed that on average EMA studies scheduled six assessments per day, lasted for 7 days, and obtained a compliance of 79%. Studies with more assessments per day scheduled fewer assessment days, yet, the number of assessments did not predict compliance or dropout rates. Compliance was significantly higher in studies providing financial incentives. Otherwise, design or sample characteristics had little effects. We discuss the implications of the findings for planning, reporting, and reviewing EMA studies.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cornelia Wrzus ◽  
Andreas B. Neubauer

Ecological Momentary Assessments (i.e., EMA, repeated assessments in daily life) are widespread in many fields of psychology and related disciplines. Yet, little knowledge exists on how differences in study designs and samples predict study compliance and dropout—two central parameters of data quality in (micro-)longitudinal research. The current meta-analysis included k = 477 articles (496 samples, total N = 677,536). For each article, we coded the design, sample characteristics, compliance, and dropout rate. The results showed that on average EMA studies scheduled six assessments per day, lasted for seven days, and obtained a compliance of 79%. Studies with more assessments per day scheduled fewer assessment days, yet, the number of assessments did not predict compliance or dropout rates. Compliance was significantly higher in studies providing financial incentives. Otherwise, design or sample characteristics had little effects. We discuss the implications of the findings for planning, reporting, and reviewing EMA studies.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pamela Charlotte Jacobsen ◽  
Sarah Muddle ◽  
Bradley Jones ◽  
Gemma Taylor

Objective: Emotional stress reactivity may be a mediating factor in the association between trauma and psychosis. This review aimed to i) identify, summarise and critically evaluate the link between emotional stress reactivity and psychotic experiences ii) examine evidence for a ‘dose-response’ relationship between stress reactivity and psychosis in the wider psychosis phenotype (i.e. sub-clinical symptoms).Method: Electronic database searches (PsychINFO, MEDLINE, EMBASE) were conducted for studies which investigated the link between stress reactivity and psychosis, psychotic symptoms, or a vulnerability to developing psychosis (wider phenotype). Cross-sectional, experimental and experience sampling method study designs were eligible for inclusion. Results: 45 eligible articles were identified (N participants= 8830). Meta-analysis (k=4, n=383) showed increases in emotional stress reactivity was associated with higher negative affect in response to event-related stress, in those with psychosis compared to controls (mean difference in beta coefficients = 0.05, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.08, p=0.004). However, this difference was small with a considerable degree of heterogeneity (p=.001, I² = 81%) so results should be interpreted with caution. Narrative synthesis showed that increased emotional stress reactivity was associated with psychosis and subclinical psychotic experiences across all study designs, however, findings were inconsistent across studies. Conclusions: The results show emotional stress reactivity is associated with both clinical and subclinical psychosis symptoms. Overall, the evidence suggests that the link between emotional stress reactivity and psychosis and emotional stress reactivity is plausible mediator between trauma and psychosis. Further longitudinal research is needed to assess this.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kendra Leigh Seaman ◽  
Sade J Abiodun ◽  
Zöe Fenn ◽  
Gregory Russell Samanez-Larkin ◽  
Rui Mata

A number of developmental theories have been proposed that make differential predictions about the links between age and temporal discounting; that is, the valuation of rewards at different points in time. Most empirical studies examining adult age differences in temporal discounting have relied on economic intertemporal choice tasks, which pit choosing a smaller, sooner monetary reward against choosing a larger, later one. Although initial studies using these tasks suggested older adults discount less than younger adults, follow-up studies provided heterogeneous, and thus inconclusive, results. Using an open science approach, we test the replicability of adult age differences in temporal discounting by conducting a preregistered systematic literature search and meta-analysis of adult age differences in intertemporal choice tasks. Across 37 cross-sectional studies (Total N = 104,736), we found no reliable relation between age and temporal discounting (r = -0.081, 95% CI [-0.185, 0.025]). We also found little evidence of publication bias or p-hacking. Exploratory analyses of moderators found no effect of experimental design (e.g., extreme-group vs. continuous age), incentives (hypothetical vs. rewards), amount of delay (e.g., days, weeks, months, or years), or quantification of discounting behavior (e.g., proportion of immediate choices vs. parameters from computational modeling). Additional analyses of 12 participant-level data sets found little support for a nonlinear relation between age and temporal discounting across adulthood. Overall, the results suggest that adult age is not reliably associated with individual differences in temporal discounting. We provide recommendations for future empirical work on temporal discounting across the adult life span.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vukašin Gligorić ◽  
Allard Feddes ◽  
Bertjan Doosje

Frankfurt defined persuasive communication that has no regard for truth, knowledge, or evidence as bullshit. Although there has been a lot of psychological research on pseudo-profound bullshit, no study examined this type of communication in politics. In the present research, we operationalize political bullshit receptivity as endorsing vague political statements, slogans, and political bullshit programs. We investigated the relationship of these three measures with pseudo-profound bullshit, ideology (political ideology, support for neoliberalism), populism, and voting behavior. Three pre-registered studies in different cultural settings (the United States, Serbia, The Netherlands; total N = 534) yielded medium to high intercorrelations between political bullshit measures and pseudo-profound bullshit, and good construct validity (hypothesized one-factor solution). A Bayesian meta-analysis showed that all political bullshit measures positively correlated with support for the free market, while only some positively correlated with social (political statements and programs) and economic conservatism (programs), and populism (programs). In the U.S., higher receptivity to political bullshit was associated with a higher probability that one voted for Trump (vs Clinton) in the past and higher intentions to vote for Trump (vs Biden and Sanders). In the Netherlands, higher receptivity to political bullshit predicted the intention to vote for the conservative-liberal People's Party for Freedom and Democracy. Exploratory analyses on merged datasets showed that higher receptivity to political bullshit was associated with a higher probability to vote for right-wing candidates/parties and lower probability for the left-wing ones. Overall, political bullshit endorsement showed good validity, opening avenues for research in political communication, especially when this communication is broad and meaningless.


2020 ◽  
Vol 133 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony T. Lee ◽  
John F. Burke ◽  
Pranathi Chunduru ◽  
Annette M. Molinaro ◽  
Robert Knowlton ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVERecent trials for temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) highlight the challenges of investigating surgical outcomes using randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Although several reviews have examined seizure-freedom outcomes from existing data, there is a need for an overall seizure-freedom rate estimated from level I data as investigators consider other methods besides RCTs to study outcomes related to new surgical interventions.METHODSThe authors performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the 3 RCTs of TLE in adults and report an overall surgical seizure-freedom rate (Engel class I) composed of level I data. An overall seizure-freedom rate was also collected from level II data (prospective cohort studies) for validation. Eligible studies were identified by filtering a published Cochrane meta-analysis of epilepsy surgery for RCTs and prospective studies, and supplemented by searching indexed terms in MEDLINE (January 1, 2012–April 1, 2018). Retrospective studies were excluded to minimize heterogeneity in patient selection and reporting bias. Data extraction was independently reverified and pooled using a fixed-effects model. The primary outcome was overall seizure freedom following surgery. The historical benchmark was applied in a noninferiority study design to compare its power to a single-study cohort.RESULTSThe overall rate of seizure freedom from level I data was 72.4% (55/76 patients, 3 RCTs), which was nearly identical to the overall seizure-freedom rate of 71.7% (1325/1849 patients, 18 studies) from prospective cohorts (z = 0.134, p = 0.89; z-test). Seizure-freedom rates from level I and II studies were consistent over the years of publication (R2< 0.01, p = 0.73). Surgery resulted in markedly improved seizure-free outcomes compared to medical management (RR 10.82, 95% CI 3.93–29.84, p < 0.01; 2 RCTs). Noninferiority study designs in which the historical benchmark was used had significantly higher power at all difference margins compared to using a single cohort alone (p < 0.001, Bonferroni’s multiple comparison test).CONCLUSIONSThe overall rate of seizure freedom for temporal lobe surgery is approximately 70% for medically refractory epilepsy. The small sample size of the RCT cohort underscores the need to move beyond standard RCTs for epilepsy surgery. This historical seizure-freedom rate may serve as a useful benchmark to guide future study designs for new surgical treatments for refractory TLE.


2021 ◽  
pp. 152483802110131
Author(s):  
Ateka A. Contractor ◽  
Stephanie V. Caldas ◽  
Megan Dolan ◽  
Nicole H. Weiss

To examine the existing knowledge base on trauma experiences and positive memories, we conducted a scoping review of trauma and post-trauma factors related to positive memory count. In July 2019, we searched PubMed, Medline, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase, and PTSDpubs for a combination of words related to “positive memories/experiences,” “trauma/posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD),” and “number/retrieval.” Twenty-one articles met inclusion criteria (adult samples, original articles in English, peer-reviewed, included trauma-exposed group or variable of trauma exposure, trauma exposure examined with a trauma measure/methodology, assessed positive memory count, empirical experimental/non-experimental study designs). Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines, two authors reviewed abstracts, completed a secondary search, and independently extracted data. Our review indicated (1) that depression and PTSD were most researched; (2) no conclusive relationships of positive memory count with several psychopathology (depression, acute stress disorder, eating disorder, and anxiety), cognitive/affective, neurobiological, and demographic factors; (3) trends of potential relationships of positive memory count with PTSD and childhood interpersonal traumas (e.g., sexual and physical abuse); and (4) lower positive memory specificity as a potential counterpart to greater overgeneral positive memory bias. Given variations in sample characteristics and methodology as well as the limited longitudinal research, conclusions are tentative and worthy of further investigations.


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Holper

Abstract Background Conditional power of network meta-analysis (NMA) can support the planning of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing medical interventions. Conditional power is the probability that updating existing inconclusive evidence in NMA with additional trial(s) will result in conclusive evidence, given assumptions regarding trial design, anticipated effect sizes, or event probabilities. Methods The present work aimed to estimate conditional power for potential future trials on antidepressant treatments. Existing evidence was based on a published network of 502 RCTs conducted between 1979-2018 assessing acute antidepressant treatment in major depressive disorder (MDD). Primary outcomes were efficacy in terms of the symptom change on the Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD) and tolerability in terms of the dropout rate due to adverse events. The network compares 21 antidepressants consisting of 231 relative treatment comparisons, 164 (efficacy) and 127 (tolerability) of which are currently assumed to have inconclusive evidence. Results Required sample sizes to achieve new conclusive evidence with at least 80% conditional power were estimated to range between N = 894 - 4190 (efficacy) and N = 521 - 1246 (tolerability). Otherwise, sample sizes ranging between N = 49 - 485 (efficacy) and N = 40 - 320 (tolerability) may require stopping for futility based on a boundary at 20% conditional power. Optimizing trial designs by considering multiple trials that contribute both direct and indirect evidence, anticipating alternative effect sizes or alternative event probabilities, may increase conditional power but required sample sizes remain high. Antidepressants having the greatest conditional power associated with smallest required sample sizes were identified as those on which current evidence is low, i.e., clomipramine, levomilnacipran, milnacipran, nefazodone, and vilazodone, with respect to both outcomes. Conclusions The present results suggest that conditional power to achieve new conclusive evidence in ongoing or future trials on antidepressant treatments is low. Limiting the use of the presented conditional power analysis are primarily due to the estimated large sample sizes which would be required in future trials as well as due to the well-known small effect sizes in antidepressant treatments. These findings may inform researchers and decision-makers regarding the clinical relevance and justification of research in ongoing or future antidepressant RCTs in MDD.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Angelina R. Sutin ◽  
Damaris Aschwanden ◽  
Martina Luchetti ◽  
Yannick Stephan ◽  
Antonio Terracciano

Background: A sense of purpose in life has been associated with healthier cognitive outcomes across adulthood, including risk of dementia. The robustness and replicability of this association, however, has yet to be evaluated systematically. Objective: To test whether a greater sense of purpose in life is associated with lower risk of dementia in four population-based cohorts and combined with the published literature. Methods: Random-effect meta-analysis of prospective studies (individual participant data and from the published literature identified through a systematic review) that examined sense of purpose and risk of incident dementia. Results: In six samples followed up to 17 years (four primary data and two published; total N = 53,499; n = 5,862 incident dementia), greater sense of purpose in life was associated with lower dementia risk (HR = 0.77, 95%CI = 0.73–0.81, p <  0.001). The association was generally consistent across cohorts (I2 = 47%), remained significant controlling for clinical (e.g., depression) and behavioral (e.g., physical inactivity) risk factors, and was not moderated by age, gender, or education. Conclusion: Sense of purpose is a replicable and robust predictor of lower risk of incident dementia and is a promising target of intervention for cognitive health outcomes.


BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. e046035
Author(s):  
Suparee Boonmanunt ◽  
Oraluck Pattanaprateep ◽  
Boonsong Ongphiphadhanakul ◽  
Gareth McKay ◽  
John Attia ◽  
...  

IntroductionObesity and being overweight are major risk factors for metabolic syndrome and non-communicable diseases. Despite the recommendation that a healthy diet and physical activity can reduce the severity of these diseases, many fail to adhere to these measures. From a behavioural economic perspective, adherence to such measures can be encouraged through financial incentives. However, additional related behavioural economic approaches may improve the effectiveness of an incentive programme. As such, we have developed a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis to summarise the current evidence from financial incentive programmes with and without behavioural economic insights for promoting healthy diet and physical activity.Methods and analysisPrevious systematic reviews, meta-analyses and individual studies were identified from Medline and Scopus in June 2020 and will be updated until December 2020. Individual studies will be selected and data extracted by two reviewers. Disagreement will be resolved by consensus or adjudicated by a third reviewer. A descriptive analysis will summarise the effectiveness of behavioural economic incentive programmes for promoting healthy diet and physical activity. Moreover, individual studies will be pooled using network meta-analyses where possible. I2 statistics and Cochran’s Q test will be used to assess heterogeneity. Risk of bias and publication bias, if appropriate, will be evaluated, as well as the overall strength of the evidence.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval for a systematic review and meta-analysis is not required. The findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020198024.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document