Cited by 120Mental Health Research TopicsPsychiatric care and mental health servicesDigital Mental Health Interventions

Insights of patients and clinicians on the promise of the experience sampling method for psychiatric care

Open access
Bos, Fionneke M., Snippe, Evelien, Bruggeman, Richard, Wichers, Marieke, van der Krieke, Lian·2019·Psychiatric Services

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This qualitative study aimed to map the relevance of the experience sampling method (ESM) for psychiatric practice and identify barriers and facilitators for implementation, as perceived by patients and clinicians. METHODS: Participants were 22 patients with various diagnoses and 21 clinicians (e.g., psychiatrists, psychologists) who participated in interviews or focus groups. Using Atlas.TI, the authors conducted qualitative thematic analysis to analyze the transcripts, resulting in four themes: applications, advantages, undesirable effects, and requirements for implementation of ESM in care. RESULTS: Clinicians and patients believed ESM could be relevant in every phase of care to increase patients' awareness, insight, and self-management; personalize interventions; and alert patients to rising symptoms. Further, ESM was expected to improve the patient-clinician relationship; lead to objective, personalized, reliable and visual data; and increase efficiency of care. However, participants warned against high assessment burden and potential symptom worsening. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides first evidence that the potential of ESM is recognized by both patients and clinicians. Key recommendations for optimal implementation of ESM in psychiatric care include flexible application of ESM, collaboration between patient and clinician, regular evaluation, awareness of negative reactivity, availability to patients with different psychiatric syndromes, and implementation by an interdisciplinary team of patients, clinicians, researchers, and information technology specialists.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1176/appi.ps.201900050

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bos, F. M., Snippe, E., Bruggeman, R., Wichers, M., & van der Krieke, L.
Affiliations
  • University Medical Center Groningen (NL)
  • Rob Giel Research Center (Bos, Bruggeman, van der Krieke) and Interdisciplinary Center Psychopathology and Emotion Regulation (Bos, Snippe, Wichers, van der Krieke), Department of Psychiatry, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Venue
Psychiatric Services
Published
2019-11-01
Volume
70
Issue
11
Pages
983-991
ISSN
  • 0022-1597 (ISSN-L)
  • 1075-2730
  • 1557-9700
OpenAlex
W2969842813
Cited by
120
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1
FWCI
15.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Psychiatric Services (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • European Commission (HORIZON2020)
  • Rijksuniversiteit Groningen
  • ZonMw (451001029)
  • Universitair Medisch Centrum Groningen
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Mental Health Research Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
Keywords
ecological momentary assessment, psychiatric nursing, implementation barriers and facilitators, patient perspectives, clinician perspectives, patient insight, self-management, personalized interventions, patient-clinician relationship, symptom worsening, assessment burden, clinical implementation
MeSH terms
Ecological Momentary Assessment, Adult, Aged, Mental Disorders, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychotherapy, Focus Groups, Qualitative Research, Young Adult, Precision Medicine

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