Cited by 275Mental Health Research TopicsMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Ecological momentary assessment versus standard assessment instruments for measuring mindfulness, depressed mood, and anxiety among older adults

Open access
Moore, Raeanne C., Depp, Colin A., Wetherell, Julie Loebach, Lenze, Eric J.·2016·Journal of Psychiatric Research

Abstract

As mobile data capture tools for patient-reported outcomes proliferate in clinical research, a key dimension of measure performance is sensitivity to change. This study compared performance of patient-reported measures of mindfulness, depression, and anxiety symptoms using traditional paper-and-pencil forms versus real-time, ambulatory measurement of symptoms via ecological momentary assessment (EMA). Sixty-seven emotionally distressed older adults completed paper-and-pencil measures of mindfulness, depression, and anxiety along with two weeks of identical items reported during ambulatory monitoring via EMA before and after participation in a randomized trial of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) or a health education intervention. We calculated effect sizes for these measures across both measurement approaches and estimated the Number-Needed-to-Treat (NNT) in both measurement conditions. Study outcomes greatly differed depending on which measurement method was used. When EMA was used to measure clinical symptoms, older adults who participated in the MBSR intervention had significantly higher mindfulness and significantly lower depression and anxiety than participants in the health education intervention at post-treatment. However, these significant changes in symptoms were not found when outcomes were measured with paper-and-pencil measures. The NNT for mindfulness and depression measures administered through EMA were approximately 25-50% lower than NNTs derived from paper-and-pencil administration. Sensitivity to change in anxiety was similar across administration modes. In conclusion, EMA measures of depression and mindfulness substantially outperformed paper-and-pencil measures with the same items. The additional resources associated with EMA in clinical trials would seem to be offset by its greater sensitivity to detect change in key outcome variables.

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 · 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2016.01.011

Cites

35 of 35 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?

  • Experiential sampling has greater sensitivity to clinical changes than standardized questionnaires.

    “(a) greater sensitivity to clinical changes (Moore et al., 2016)”

    From Online ACT intervention for fibromyalgia: An exploratory study of feasibility and preliminary effectiveness with smartphone-delivered experiential sampling assessment (2022) · cites this paper as Moore et al., 2016

    The Discussion reports that ecological momentary assessment may be more sensitive than paper-and-pencil measures to changes in depression and mindfulness after a mindfulness intervention in distressed older adults. It also says sensitivity to change in anxiety was comparable across methods, so the unqualified claim of greater sensitivity to clinical changes overstates the finding. The supplied passages do not provide page numbers. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • EMA has advantages over one-time in-clinic measures, including generating more stable estimates of neurobehavioural symptoms for outcomes research, assessing dynamic changes among theoretically linked constructs, reducing recall bias for patients with neurobehavioural disorders, and enabling modeling of causal intra-individual relationships.

    “This approach has many advantages87 over “one-time, in-clinic” measures, including the generation of more stable estimates of neurobehavioural symptoms for outcomes research;88 the assessment of dynamic changes among theoretically linked constructs;89 the reduction of recall bias for patients with neurobehavioural disorders;90,91 and the ability to model causal intra-individual relationships.92”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Moore, R. C., Depp, C. A., Wetherell, J. L., & Lenze, E. J.
Affiliations
  • University of California San Diego (US)
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
Corresponding author
Moore, Raeanne C.
Venue
Journal of Psychiatric Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-04
Volume
75
Pages
116-123
ISSN
0022-3956 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2263248765
Cited by
274
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 29 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 38 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 7
FWCI
29.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Psychiatric Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Aging (AG049369, R01AG049369)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (K23MH107260, L30 MH104725, R01MH100417, MH100417)
  • National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (R34AT007070, R34AT007064)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
ecological momentary assessment, mindfulness, depression, anxiety, older adults, mindfulness-based stress reduction, patient-reported outcomes, ambulatory monitoring, number needed to treat, sensitivity to change, health education intervention, emotional distress
MeSH terms
Ecological Momentary Assessment, Aged, Anxiety Disorders, Depression, Female, Humans, Male, Statistics as Topic, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Executive Function, Mindfulness

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