JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) is a research design that allows for the measurement of nearly instantaneous experiences within the participant’s natural environment. Using EMA can help improve recall bias, ecological validity, and patient engagement, while enhancing personalization and the ubiquity of interventions. A population that can benefit from the usage of EMA is the Men who have Sex with Men (MSM) population. Previous EMA studies have been successful in capturing patterns of depression, anxiety, substance use, and risky sexual behavior. These findings are directly relevant to the MSM population that have high rates of each of these psychological and behavioral outcomes. Although there is a driving force behind the growing literature surrounding EMAs among the MSM population, to date, no synthesizing reviews exist.

Objective:

The aim of our present study it to (1) synthesize the literature across fields on how EMA methods have been utilized among MSM, (2) to better understand the feasibility and acceptability of EMA interventions among the MSM population,(3) and to inform designs for future research studies on best evidence-based practices for EMA interventions.

Methods:

Based on four library databases, we conducted a scoping review of EMAs utilized within interventions among the MSM population. The eligibility criteria included having to be peer-reviewed studies conducted in the United States and using EMA methodology in an intervention for the MSM. Modeling after the CDC compendium of evidence-based interventions as the framework, we applied a typology utilizing nine distinct review criteria such as: sample size; designs of the intervention; random assignment, designs of the follow-up investigation; and rates of retention and rates of engagement.

Results:

Results (k=15, total n=952) indicated a range of sample sizes, the smallest sample size was n=12, while the largest sample size was n=120. 46.67%, of the studies focused on outcomes related to substance usage or outcomes related to psychological experiences. One-third of the studies implemented an EMA intervention across 30 days. Two studies utilized random assignment and two studies were quasi-experimental designs. Ten studies reported acceptable retention rates greater than 70%. The outcomes that were event-contingent prompts were found to be difficult for the population to engage with, having rates as low as 37.3%.

Conclusions:

Our systematic scoping review indicates strong evidence that EMA methodology is both feasible and acceptable at high rates among the MSM population, especially, when examining psychological and behavioral outcomes such as negative or positive affect, risky sexual behavior, and substance use. Further research on the optimal designs of EMA-embedded interventions for the MSM population is warranted. Clinical Trial: N/A