Cited by 24Mental Health Research TopicsDigital Mental Health InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

The acceptability of real‐time health monitoring among community participants with depression: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of the literature

Open access
Girolamo, Giovanni, Barattieri di San Pietro, Chiara, Bulgari, Viola, Dagani, Jessica, Ferrari, Clarissa, Hotopf, Matthew, Iannone, Giuseppe, Macis, Ambra +7 more·2020·Depression and Anxiety

Abstract

Background The application of experience sampling method/ecological momentary assessment (ESM/EMA) methods to individuals with major depressive disorder (MDD) seems promising, but evidence about their acceptability is still unclear. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis (registration number CRD42017060438) was to investigate the acceptability of ESM/EMA techniques for health monitoring in patients with MDD, by examining the dropout rate and related-reasons, and to explore the effects of individual, methodological, and technical features on dropping out. Method According to PRISMA guidelines, after leading a systematic search on major electronic databases, a structured process for selecting and collecting data was followed. Results A total of 19 studies were included in the analyses. From results, it emerged a dropout rate of 3.6%. Our findings showed that the use of paper and pencil tools in combination with electronic devices, the time-based sampling method, and not providing monetary incentives significantly increase the dropout rate of patients with MDD during ESM/EMA monitoring. Age, gender, depression severity, duration of monitoring, number of assessments each day, and number of questions did not affect dropout rate. Conclusions The results of this systematic review may assist clinicians and researchers in planning, implementing, or evaluating the use of ESM/EMA to assess the health status of community-based individuals with MDD.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/da.23023

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 49 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. ICH Expert Working Group (1998). Statistical principles for clinical trials E9. Paper presented at the International conference on harmonisation of technical requirements for registration of pharmaceuticals for human use, London.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Girolamo, G., Barattieri di San Pietro, C., Bulgari, V., Dagani, J., Ferrari, C., Hotopf, M., Iannone, G., Macis, A., Matcham, F., Myin‐Germeys, I., Rintala, A., Simblett, S., Wykes, T., Zarbo, C., & the RADAR‐CNS Consortium
Affiliations
  • Centro San Giovanni di Dio Fatebenefratelli (IT)
  • Department of Psychology University of Milano‐Bicocca Milan Italy
  • King's College London (GB)
  • KU Leuven (BE)
Corresponding author
Girolamo, Giovanni
Venue
Depression and Anxiety
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-04-27
Volume
37
Issue
9
Pages
885-897
ISSN
  • 1091-4269 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-6394
OpenAlex
W3020056820
Cited by
24
References
49
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1
FWCI
0.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Depression and Anxiety (publishedVersion)
  • BOA (University of Milano-Bicocca) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Institutional Research Information System (Università degli Studi di Brescia) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking (115902)
  • European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme and EFPIA
  • National Institute for Health Research
  • Biomedical Research Centre at South London
  • Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
ecological momentary assessment, major depressive disorder, real-time health monitoring, participant dropout, acceptability, financial incentives

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review