Cited by 761Mental Health Research TopicsDigital Mental Health InterventionsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Ambulatory Assessment

Open access
Trull, Timothy J., Ebner-Priemer, Ulrich·2013·Annual Review of Clinical Psychology

Abstract

Ambulatory assessment (AA) covers a wide range of assessment methods to study people in their natural environment, including self-report, observational, and biological/physiological/behavioral. AA methods minimize retrospective biases while gathering ecologically valid data from patients' everyday life in real time or near real time. Here, we report on the major characteristics of AA, and we provide examples of applications of AA in clinical psychology (a) to investigate mechanisms and dynamics of symptoms, (b) to predict the future recurrence or onset of symptoms, (c) to monitor treatment effects, (d) to predict treatment success, (e) to prevent relapse, and (f) as interventions. In addition, we present and discuss the most pressing and compelling future AA applications: technological developments (the smartphone), improved ecological validity of laboratory results by combined lab-field studies, and investigating gene-environment interactions. We conclude with a discussion of acceptability, compliance, privacy, and ethical issues.

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 · 10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-050212-185510

Cites

117 of 117 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Trull, T. J., & Ebner-Priemer, U.
Affiliations
  • University of Missouri (US)
  • Institute for Sport and Sport Science, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, 76131 Karlsruhe, Germany; Central Institute of Mental Health, 68072 Mannheim, Germany
Venue
Annual Review of Clinical Psychology
Published
2013-03-28
Volume
9
Issue
1
Pages
151-176
ISSN
  • 1548-5943 (ISSN-L)
  • 1548-5951
OpenAlex
W4235675284
Cited by
761
References
112
Citations by year
2026: 82 · 2025: 72 · 2024: 67 · 2023: 61 · 2022: 56 · 2021: 77 · 2020: 85 · 2019: 61 · 2018: 52 · 2017: 44 · 2016: 34 · 2015: 37 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 9
FWCI
3.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Annual Review of Clinical Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (P60AA011998)
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
ambulatory assessment, ecological validity, self-report, observational assessment, physiological assessment, symptom dynamics, recurrence prediction, treatment monitoring, treatment response prediction, relapse prevention, smartphone technology, gene-environment interaction, research ethics, participant compliance, privacy
MeSH terms
Mental Disorders, Data Collection, Humans, Psychology, Clinical, Monitoring, Ambulatory

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