Irene Jaén, María Mostazo-Arolo, Rosa Lorente-Català
{"title":"A Systematic Review of Ecological Momentary Assessment for Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder","authors":"Irene Jaén, María Mostazo-Arolo, Rosa Lorente-Català","doi":"10.1002/jclp.70202","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is characterized by its symptomatology heterogeneity, which poses challenges for its assessment and treatment. Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) has been proposed as a promising method for gathering information and may offer advantages over retrospective methods. The present study aims to conduct a systematic review of the use of EMA in OCD, examining the main variables assessed, methodological considerations, and the advantages of EMA compared with retrospective measures to assess OCD. The systematic search was conducted using databases including Scopus, Pubmed, Web of Science, PsycNET, and Cochrane Library. Of the identified studies, 28 met the inclusion criteria. These studies focused on the assessment of obsessions, compulsions, experiential avoidance, and sleep, with compulsions being the most studied variable. The studies reveal diverse EMA methods, with traditional paper recordings and smartphones differing in frequency and duration of the records. Some studies reported that EMA may serve as a valid and sensitive tool for detecting changes in OCD and overcome some limitations of retrospective assessments. Despite the potential of EMA, their validity is still questionable, and their application during intervention processes is limited, particularly given the heterogeneity of the available evidence and the limited application of EMA during intervention processes. Further research is essential to enhance their integration in clinical settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":15395,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Psychology","volume":"82 11","pages":"1744-1768"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jclp.70202","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jclp.70202","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/8/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is characterized by its symptomatology heterogeneity, which poses challenges for its assessment and treatment. Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) has been proposed as a promising method for gathering information and may offer advantages over retrospective methods. The present study aims to conduct a systematic review of the use of EMA in OCD, examining the main variables assessed, methodological considerations, and the advantages of EMA compared with retrospective measures to assess OCD. The systematic search was conducted using databases including Scopus, Pubmed, Web of Science, PsycNET, and Cochrane Library. Of the identified studies, 28 met the inclusion criteria. These studies focused on the assessment of obsessions, compulsions, experiential avoidance, and sleep, with compulsions being the most studied variable. The studies reveal diverse EMA methods, with traditional paper recordings and smartphones differing in frequency and duration of the records. Some studies reported that EMA may serve as a valid and sensitive tool for detecting changes in OCD and overcome some limitations of retrospective assessments. Despite the potential of EMA, their validity is still questionable, and their application during intervention processes is limited, particularly given the heterogeneity of the available evidence and the limited application of EMA during intervention processes. Further research is essential to enhance their integration in clinical settings.
强迫症(OCD)具有症状异质性的特点,这给其评估和治疗带来了挑战。生态瞬时评估(EMA)被认为是一种有前途的信息收集方法,可能比回顾性方法更具优势。本研究旨在对EMA在强迫症中的应用进行系统回顾,检查评估的主要变量、方法学考虑因素,以及EMA与回顾性评估强迫症的优势。使用Scopus、Pubmed、Web of Science、PsycNET、Cochrane Library等数据库进行系统检索。在确定的研究中,有28项符合纳入标准。这些研究集中于对强迫、强迫、经验回避和睡眠的评估,强迫是研究最多的变量。这些研究揭示了不同的EMA方法,传统的纸质记录和智能手机在记录的频率和持续时间上有所不同。一些研究报道,EMA可以作为检测强迫症变化的有效和敏感的工具,并克服回顾性评估的一些局限性。尽管EMA有潜力,但其有效性仍然值得怀疑,并且在干预过程中的应用受到限制,特别是考虑到现有证据的异质性和EMA在干预过程中的有限应用。进一步的研究对于加强它们在临床环境中的整合是必不可少的。
期刊介绍:
Founded in 1945, the Journal of Clinical Psychology is a peer-reviewed forum devoted to research, assessment, and practice. Published eight times a year, the Journal includes research studies; articles on contemporary professional issues, single case research; brief reports (including dissertations in brief); notes from the field; and news and notes. In addition to papers on psychopathology, psychodiagnostics, and the psychotherapeutic process, the journal welcomes articles focusing on psychotherapy effectiveness research, psychological assessment and treatment matching, clinical outcomes, clinical health psychology, and behavioral medicine.