Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Currently accepted at: JMIR Formative Research

Date Submitted: Jan 5, 2026
Date Accepted: Jun 5, 2026

This paper has been accepted and is currently in production.

It will appear shortly on 10.2196/83548

The final accepted version (not copyedited yet) is in this tab.

Using ecological momentary assessment (EMA) to document and investigate caregiver practice between pediatric therapy sessions: A prospective pilot cohort study

  • Jennifer K James; 
  • Mary P Shotwell; 
  • Hannah M Jensen; 
  • Shirley A James

ABSTRACT

Background:

Determining the appropriate dosage of pediatric occupational therapy, physical therapy, and speech-language pathology services is important for supporting families of children with disabilities. Documentation of therapy dosage is lacking in pediatric studies, and documentation of the ways caregivers do or do not apply strategies between formal therapy sessions is even less common. Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) is one way to document caregiver practice between therapy sessions and can be a tool for determining factors that influence this practice.

Objective:

The objective of our study was to pilot the use of EMA to measure caregiver practice between therapy sessions, compare EMA data with caregiver recall, and identify factors significantly associated with changes in caregiver practice.

Methods:

Patients were recruited from pediatric therapy programs. They completed an initial survey including demographic information and the amount of practice they expected to complete. Following this, they completed 30 days of EMA, logging the practice they completed with their child. After 30 days, they participated in a follow-up conversation to provide more information about their practice experiences.

Results:

A total of 5 caregivers participated, for a total of 150 days of EMA. Participants logged 55% (82/150) days of practice, identifying in follow-up conversations that they often did not log on days practice did not occur. Participants reported an average of 2.65 practice bouts per day, with an average of 6.48 minutes per bout, for a total average of 23.19 minutes of practice per day. Factors significantly associated with increased caregiver practice were having at least 4 therapy sessions per month (compared to a referent group of 2 sessions per month) (β=17.52, p<.0001), therapy strategies fitting into daily routines (β=11.02, p<.0001), therapy that was fun for the child (β=10.77, p=.0009), and remembering support received from the therapist (β=6.66, p<.0087).

Conclusions:

As shown by the EMA data, caregivers practice most when their therapy supports occur frequently, incorporate daily routines, are fun for the child, and are memorable for the caregiver. Caregivers tend to practice multiple times daily for less than 10 minutes at a time, which further emphasizes the importance of teaching strategies that can be accomplished quickly during existing routines. Our sample size was small, but this pilot study demonstrates the potential of EMA to document caregiver practice between sessions and provides a basis for future studies with larger sample sizes. Clinical Trial: n/a


 Citation

Please cite as:

James JK, Shotwell MP, Jensen HM, James SA

Using ecological momentary assessment (EMA) to document and investigate caregiver practice between pediatric therapy sessions: A prospective pilot cohort study

JMIR Formative Research. 05/06/2026:83548 (forthcoming/in press)

DOI: 10.2196/83548

URL: https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/83548

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© 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.