Examination of Acceptability, Feasibility, and Iatrogenic Effects of Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) of Suicidal Ideation.

IF 4.3 3区 材料科学 Q1 ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC
ACS Applied Electronic Materials Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2023-12-14 DOI:10.1177/10731911231216053
L M M Kivelä, F Fiß, W van der Does, N Antypa
{"title":"Examination of Acceptability, Feasibility, and Iatrogenic Effects of Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) of Suicidal Ideation.","authors":"L M M Kivelä, F Fiß, W van der Does, N Antypa","doi":"10.1177/10731911231216053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) can be used to examine the dynamics of suicidal ideation in daily life. While the general acceptability and feasibility of EMA in suicide research has been established, further examination of potential iatrogenic effects (i.e., negative reactivity) and identifying those more likely to react negatively is needed. Participants (<i>N</i> = 82) with current suicidal ideation completed 21 days of EMA (4×/day) and filled in <i>M</i> = 78% (<i>Med</i> = 84%) of the EMA. No positive or negative affect reactivity was observed in EMA ratings over the study period. Retrospectively, most participants rated their experience as positive (69%); 22% indicated mood worsening, and 18% suicidal ideation reactivity. Those with more borderline personality traits, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and higher depressive, anxiety, and suicidal ideation symptoms, were more likely to report iatrogenic effects. In conclusion, while high compliance rates and lack of affect reactivity during EMA indicate that EMA is well tolerated in suicide research, a minority of participants may report subjective mood effects in retrospect.</p>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11292966/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10731911231216053","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) can be used to examine the dynamics of suicidal ideation in daily life. While the general acceptability and feasibility of EMA in suicide research has been established, further examination of potential iatrogenic effects (i.e., negative reactivity) and identifying those more likely to react negatively is needed. Participants (N = 82) with current suicidal ideation completed 21 days of EMA (4×/day) and filled in M = 78% (Med = 84%) of the EMA. No positive or negative affect reactivity was observed in EMA ratings over the study period. Retrospectively, most participants rated their experience as positive (69%); 22% indicated mood worsening, and 18% suicidal ideation reactivity. Those with more borderline personality traits, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and higher depressive, anxiety, and suicidal ideation symptoms, were more likely to report iatrogenic effects. In conclusion, while high compliance rates and lack of affect reactivity during EMA indicate that EMA is well tolerated in suicide research, a minority of participants may report subjective mood effects in retrospect.

研究自杀意念生态瞬间评估 (EMA) 的可接受性、可行性和先天性影响。
生态瞬间评估(EMA)可用于研究日常生活中自杀意念的动态变化。虽然 EMA 在自杀研究中的普遍可接受性和可行性已经得到证实,但仍需进一步研究其潜在的先天效应(即消极反应性),并确定哪些人更有可能做出消极反应。有自杀意念的参与者(N = 82)完成了 21 天的 EMA(4×/天),填写了 M = 78% (Med = 84%)的 EMA。在研究期间,EMA 评分中未观察到积极或消极情绪反应。回顾过去,大多数参与者对自己的经历给予了积极评价(69%);22%的人表示情绪恶化,18%的人有自杀倾向。有更多边缘型人格特征、创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)以及更严重的抑郁、焦虑和自杀意念症状的人更有可能报告先天性影响。总之,虽然 EMA 的依从率高且在 EMA 过程中没有情绪反应,这表明 EMA 在自杀研究中的耐受性良好,但少数参与者可能会在事后报告主观情绪影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
567
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信