Accepted for/Published in: Journal of Medical Internet Research
Date Submitted: Dec 21, 2023
Date Accepted: Oct 4, 2024
Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.
Data quality of a large-scale ecological momentary assessment study on mental health problems among university students
ABSTRACT
Background:
There is a lack of knowledge on the determinants of participation, compliance, and completion rates in ecological momentary assessment (EMA) studies as well as on the reliability of EMA measures and responses.
Objective:
To assess ecological momentary assessment data quality in a large sample of university students.
Methods:
A total of 1,259 university students were invited to participate in a 15-day EMA study on mental health problems. Logistic and Poisson regression investigated the associations of sociodemographic factors, lifetime adverse experiences, 12-month stressful events, and mental disorder screens with EMA participation, compliance, and completion. Multilevel reliability and intraclass coefficient scores were obtained for positive and negative affect measures. Careless responses were identified based on low compliance or within-person reliability scores.
Results:
Of those invited, 782 (62.1%) participated in the EMA study and 645 (82.5%) completed it (mean compliance= 76.9%). Participation was associated with being female (OR= 1.41, CI95= 1.06-1.87), age 30 or more (OR= 0.20, CI95= 0.08-0.43; vs age 18-21), 12-month death of friend of family member (OR= 0.73, CI95= 0.57-0.94), and 12-month suicide attempt (OR=0.26, CI95= 0.10-0.64). Completion was associated with childhood-adolescent sexual abuse (OR=0.41, CI95= 0.20-0.90) and neglect (OR=0.57, CI95= 0.36-0.92), and with 12-month sexual assault or rape (OR= 0.29, CI95= 0.12-0.77) and sexual harassment (OR = 0.62, CI95= 0.39-0.99). Between-person reliability of negative and positive affect was strong (α> 0.9), while within-person reliability was fair to moderate (α> 0.4). Of all answered assessments (n= 33,626), 0.86% were flagged careless responses, while 17.5% of participants could be considered careless responders, mostly due to low compliance.
Conclusions:
Future EMA research should implement strategies to mitigate non-response bias as well as conduct sensitivity analyses to assess possible exclusion of careless responders. Clinical Trial: osf.io/p7csq
Citation
Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.