Early intervention in psychiatry · 2026
Mobile Technology for Real-Life Assessment of Positive and Negative Symptoms as well as Stress Among Individuals With Early Psychosis: A Scoping Review.
СтатьяScoping ReviewНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ishii Azusa, Takano Keisuke, Moriishi Chihiro, MacLellan Alexander, Kimura Kenta
Аннотация
AIM: This scoping review aimed to systematically provide an overview of existing findings on the use of ecological momentary assessment (EMA) and related mobile sensing to assess positive and negative symptoms, as well as stress, in individuals at clinical high risk for psychosis (CHR-P) and those with first-episode psychosis (FEP).
METHODS: Following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines, PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science were searched for empirical studies published up to October 2025. Eligible studies assessed positive and negative symptoms and stress in daily life using EMA or related mobile sensing implemented on contemporary devices. Data were extracted on study characteristics, EMA design (sampling schedule, prompting logic, duration, completion rates), and domains assessed and were summarised descriptively.
RESULTS: Ten studies (14 records) met the inclusion criteria. Most used smartphone-based EMA with semi-random prompts 4-10 times daily over 6-28 days. Six assessed positive symptoms, three negative symptoms and two stress. Symptoms were all assessed through self-report EMA, while stress was assessed through self-report EMA in one study and objectively through skin conductance in one. The reporting of completion, item validity, and incentive structure was inconsistent, limiting comparability across studies.
CONCLUSIONS: Self-report EMA offers a feasible method for real-world assessment of symptoms and stress; however, mobile sensing remains underutilised.
IMPLICATIONS: Future research should integrate EMA and related mobile sensing, employ validated indicators and standardise reporting practises to enhance methodological transparency and clinical utility.
METHODS: Following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines, PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science were searched for empirical studies published up to October 2025. Eligible studies assessed positive and negative symptoms and stress in daily life using EMA or related mobile sensing implemented on contemporary devices. Data were extracted on study characteristics, EMA design (sampling schedule, prompting logic, duration, completion rates), and domains assessed and were summarised descriptively.
RESULTS: Ten studies (14 records) met the inclusion criteria. Most used smartphone-based EMA with semi-random prompts 4-10 times daily over 6-28 days. Six assessed positive symptoms, three negative symptoms and two stress. Symptoms were all assessed through self-report EMA, while stress was assessed through self-report EMA in one study and objectively through skin conductance in one. The reporting of completion, item validity, and incentive structure was inconsistent, limiting comparability across studies.
CONCLUSIONS: Self-report EMA offers a feasible method for real-world assessment of symptoms and stress; however, mobile sensing remains underutilised.
IMPLICATIONS: Future research should integrate EMA and related mobile sensing, employ validated indicators and standardise reporting practises to enhance methodological transparency and clinical utility.