Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Jul 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Pain. 2018 Jan 31;19(7):699–716. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2018.01.006

Table 3.

Reporting recommendations for EMA studies of pain intensity

Introduction Report the following:
  Rationale

  1. Rationale for the use of EMA (e.g., to examine within-patient relationships, to ensure ecological validity)
Methods Report the following:
  Data input

  1. Data input device type (e.g., paper booklet, palmtop computer, smartphone) or combination of device types

  2. Device model, operating system, and software (if applicable)

  3. Data input device features (e.g., delay/suspense function)
  Sampling approach

  1. Number of waves of EMA data collection

  2. Number of days per wave

  3. Targeted number of prompts per day

  4. Prompting strategy (event-based, interval-based)

  5. Type of schedule (fixed, random, or combination)
  Pain intensity item

  1. Precise wording of item/s (including whether a specific bodily area was to be rated)

  2. Type of response scale (e.g., NRS, VAS) with anchor descriptors

  3. Number of response options

  4. Reporting period (e.g., right now, before prompt, past 2 hours)
Results Report the following:
  Completion rates

  1. Attrition rates throughout the study

  2. Reasons for missed prompts (e.g., technical failure, noncompliance)

  3. Completion rate distributions (mean, median, SD, range) for full sample and analysis sample (if different)

  4. Systematic differences in completion rates (e.g., by time of day, by demographic variables)
  Statistical reporting

  1. Between-and within-patient variance components or reliability estimates (e.g., intraclass correlations)