CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 125Mental Health Research TopicsSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesDigital Mental Health Interventions

Feasibility and validity of ecological momentary assessment in the investigation of suicide risk

Husky, Mathilde, Olié, Emilie, Guillaume, Sébastien, Genty, Catherine, Swendsen, Joel, Courtet, Philippe·2014·Psychiatry Research
DOI 10.1016/j.psychres.2014.08.019
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Ecological Momentary Assessment has been used to investigate a wide range of behaviors and psychiatric conditions. Previous investigations have consistently obtained promising results with high acceptance and compliance rates, and with only minor reactive effects for specific variables. Despite the promise of this methodology for the study of severe psychiatric populations, little is known about its feasibility in samples at risk for suicide. In the present study, four samples at varying risk for suicide completed an Ecological Momentary Assessment study by responding to five electronic assessments per day over a one-week period. Samples included healthy controls (n=13), affective controls (n=21), past suicide attempters (n=20), and recent suicide attempters (n=42). The results demonstrate satisfactory participation rates and high compliance with daily life repeated assessments across all groups. Importantly, negative thoughts or suicidal ideation were not reactive to the duration of the study, indicating that the repeated assessment of such cognitions in daily life have little or no effect on their frequency. The findings provide support for the use of Ecological Momentary Assessment in the study of suicidal ideation and suggest that mobile technologies represent new opportunities for the assessment of high-risk cognitive states experienced by patients in daily life.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.psychres.2014.08.019

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Fixed schedules were almost exclusively used in studies with once-daily prompts, whereas pseudo-random schedules were typically used for repeated within-day assessments.

    “Fixed schedules were almost exclusively used in studies with once-daily prompts (as well as three older studies with PDAs (45, 81, 82)), whereas pseudo-random schedules were typically used for repeated within-day assessments.”

    From Don't Miss the Moment: A Systematic Review of Ecological Momentary Assessment in Suicide Research (2022) · cites this paper as [81]

  • Studies frequently (57%, n = 13) reported that participants could provide input about their daily schedules, allowing EMA prompt windows to be adjusted for each participant.

    “Studies frequently (57%, n = 13; (47, 51, 58, 60, 61, 69, 71, 79–81, 85, 86)) reported that participants could provide input about their daily schedules (incl. sleep and wake times), allowing EMA prompt windows to be adjusted for each participant”

    From Don't Miss the Moment: A Systematic Review of Ecological Momentary Assessment in Suicide Research (2022) · cites this paper as [81]

  • Baseline depression severity (HAMD) predicted EMA-assessed sad mood and negative thoughts, including suicidal ideation.

    “Baseline depression severity [Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, HAMD (92)] predicted EMA-assessed sad mood and negative thoughts (incl. suicidal ideation) (81).”

    From Don't Miss the Moment: A Systematic Review of Ecological Momentary Assessment in Suicide Research (2022) · cites this paper as [81]

  • Practice effects were observed by participant response times decreasing over time.

    “Practice effects were also observed by participant's response times decreasing over time (81).”

    From Don't Miss the Moment: A Systematic Review of Ecological Momentary Assessment in Suicide Research (2022) · cites this paper as [81]

  • Acceptance was highest among outpatients with a recent history of a suicide attempt (88%), compared to clinical controls (68%) and healthy controls (77%).

    “Comparing three subgroups, acceptance was highest among outpatients with a recent history of a suicide attempt (88%), as compared to clinical controls (i.e., 68% outpatients without a history of suicide attempts), and healthy controls [77%; (81)].”

    From Don't Miss the Moment: A Systematic Review of Ecological Momentary Assessment in Suicide Research (2022) · cites this paper as [81]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Husky, M., Olié, E., Guillaume, S., Genty, C., Swendsen, J., & Courtet, P.
Affiliations
  • Institut Universitaire de France (FR)
  • Inserm (FR)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
Corresponding author
Husky, Mathilde
ORCID
Venue
Psychiatry Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-12
Volume
220
Issue
1-2
Pages
564-570
ISSN
0165-1781 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.psychres.2014.08.019
OpenAlex
W2095267443
Cited by
124
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 1
FWCI
12.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Psychiatry Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
Keywords
ecological momentary assessment, suicide risk, suicidal ideation, suicide attempters, mobile technology, reactivity effects, participant compliance
MeSH terms
Adult, Mental Disorders, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Suicide, Attempted, Risk Assessment, Suicidal Ideation

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