Measuring Criterion Validity of Microinteraction Ecological Momentary Assessment (Micro-EMA): Exploratory Pilot Study With Physical Activity Measurement.
Measuring Criterion Validity of Microinteraction Ecological Momentary Assessment (Micro-EMA): Exploratory Pilot Study With Physical Activity Measurement.
复制标题
DOI：
10.2196/23391
复制
发表时间：
2021-03-10
影响因子：
5
通讯作者：
Intille S
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ponnada A;Thapa-Chhetry B;Manjourides J;Intille S
生态瞬时评估（EMA）是一种使用移动的设备收集自我行为报告的现场方法。在典型的基于电话的EMA中，参与者会被反复提示多项选择题，这往往会造成参与负担。或者，微交互EMA（micro-EMA或μEMA）是一种EMA，其中所有的自我报告提示都是单问题调查，可以使用智能手表上的一键可浏览微交互方便地回答。先前的工作表明，μEMA可能允许比EMA高得多的提示率，产生更高的响应率和更低的参与负担。这是通过确保μEMA提示问题快速且易于回答来实现的。然而，尚未正式评估μEMA自我报告中参与者回答的有效性。在这项初步研究中，我们探索了智能手表上的μEMA自我报告的标准有效性，使用身体活动（PA）评估作为感兴趣的行为的例子。共有17名参与者使用定制的μEMA智能手表应用程序每天回答72个μEMA提示，持续1周。在每个提示下，他们通过点击智能手表屏幕自我报告他们是否正在进行久坐，轻度/站立，中度/步行或剧烈活动。反应进行了比较，一个研究级的活动监视器上的优势脚踝同时（和连续）测量PA。参与者的μEMA完成率为87.01%（5226/6006），依从率为74.00%（5226/7062），回答提示平均只需5.4（SD 1.5）秒。当将μEMA反应与活动监测器进行比较时，我们在活动监测器上观察到，与久坐或轻度/站立活动相比，当参与者自我报告参与中度+剧烈活动时，瞬时PA水平显着较高（P<.001）。当随机生成μEMA响应时（即，模拟智能手表上的粗心敲击），相同的比较没有产生活动监测器记录的瞬时PA水平的任何显著差异。对于PA测量，高频μEMA自我报告可用于捕获与久坐、轻度和中度+剧烈活动的研究级连续传感器一致的信息，表明标准有效性。初步结果显示，参与者并没有通过随机点击智能手表来粗心地回答μEMA提示，而是报告了他们当时的真实行为。然而，需要更多的研究来检验μEMA在测量剧烈活动时的标准有效性。
Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) is an in situ method of gathering self-report on behaviors using mobile devices. In typical phone-based EMAs, participants are prompted repeatedly with multiple-choice questions, often causing participation burden. Alternatively, microinteraction EMA (micro-EMA or μEMA) is a type of EMA where all the self-report prompts are single-question surveys that can be answered using a 1-tap glanceable microinteraction conveniently on a smartwatch. Prior work suggests that μEMA may permit a substantially higher prompting rate than EMA, yielding higher response rates and lower participation burden. This is achieved by ensuring μEMA prompt questions are quick and cognitively simple to answer. However, the validity of participant responses from μEMA self-report has not yet been formally assessed. In this pilot study, we explored the criterion validity of μEMA self-report on a smartwatch, using physical activity (PA) assessment as an example behavior of interest. A total of 17 participants answered 72 μEMA prompts each day for 1 week using a custom-built μEMA smartwatch app. At each prompt, they self-reported whether they were doing sedentary, light/standing, moderate/walking, or vigorous activities by tapping on the smartwatch screen. Responses were compared with a research-grade activity monitor worn on the dominant ankle simultaneously (and continuously) measuring PA. Participants had an 87.01% (5226/6006) μEMA completion rate and a 74.00% (5226/7062) compliance rate taking an average of only 5.4 (SD 1.5) seconds to answer a prompt. When comparing μEMA responses with the activity monitor, we observed significantly higher (P<.001) momentary PA levels on the activity monitor when participants self-reported engaging in moderate+vigorous activities compared with sedentary or light/standing activities. The same comparison did not yield any significant differences in momentary PA levels as recorded by the activity monitor when the μEMA responses were randomly generated (ie, simulating careless taps on the smartwatch). For PA measurement, high-frequency μEMA self-report could be used to capture information that appears consistent with that of a research-grade continuous sensor for sedentary, light, and moderate+vigorous activity, suggesting criterion validity. The preliminary results show that participants were not carelessly answering μEMA prompts by randomly tapping on the smartwatch but were reporting their true behavior at that moment. However, more research is needed to examine the criterion validity of μEMA when measuring vigorous activities.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
7.4
作者：
Bruening M;van Woerden I;Todd M;Brennhofer S;Laska MN;Dunton G
通讯作者：
Dunton G
影响因子：
5
作者：
Matthews, Charles E.;Chen, Kong Y.;Troiano, Richard P.
通讯作者：
Troiano, Richard P.
影响因子：
3.8
作者：
Dunton, Genevieve Fridlund;Liao, Yue;Intille, Stephen
通讯作者：
Intille, Stephen
影响因子：
7.4
作者：
Knell, Gregory;Gabriel, Kelley Pettee;Kendzor, Darla E.
通讯作者：
Kendzor, Darla E.
影响因子：
5.5
作者：
Dunton, GF;Whalen, CK;Floro, JN
通讯作者：
Floro, JN