Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Feb 11;20(2):e0318772.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0318772. eCollection 2025.

Ecological momentary assessment of physical and eating behaviours: The WEALTH feasibility and optimisation study with recommendations for large-scale data collection

Affiliations

Ecological momentary assessment of physical and eating behaviours: The WEALTH feasibility and optimisation study with recommendations for large-scale data collection

Michael Janek et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) enables the real-time capture of health-related behaviours, their situational contexts, and associated subjective experiences. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of an EMA targeting physical and eating behaviours, optimise its protocol, and provide recommendations for future large-scale EMA data collections. The study involved 52 participants (age 31±9 years, 56% females) from Czechia, France, Germany, and Ireland completing a 9-day free-living EMA protocol using the HealthReact platform connected to a Fitbit tracker. The EMA protocol included time-based (7/day), event-based (up to 10/day), and self-initiated surveys, each containing 8 to 17 items assessing physical and eating behaviours and related contextual factors such as affective states, location, and company. Qualitative insights were gathered from post-EMA feedback interviews. Compliance was low (median 49%), particularly for event-based surveys (median 34%), and declined over time. Many participants were unable or unwilling to complete surveys in certain contexts (e.g., when with family), faced interference with their daily schedules, and encountered occasional technical issues, suggesting the need for thorough initial training, an individualised protocol, and systematic compliance monitoring. The number of event-based surveys was less than desired for the study, with a median of 2.4/day for sedentary events, when 4 were targeted, and 0.9/day for walking events, when 3 were targeted. Conducting simulations using participants' Fitbit data allowed for optimising the triggering rules, achieving the desired median number of sedentary and walking surveys (3.9/day for both) in similar populations. Self-initiated reports of meals and drinks yielded more reports than those prompted in time-based and event-based EMA surveys, suggesting that self-initiated surveys might better reflect actual eating behaviours. This study highlights the importance of assessing feasibility and optimising EMA protocols to enhance subsequent compliance and data quality. Conducting pre-tests to refine protocols and procedures, including simulations using participants' activity data for optimal event-based triggering rules, is crucial for successful large-scale data collection in EMA studies of physical and eating behaviours.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Schematic overview of the EMA protocol.
Fig 2
Fig 2
Temporal trends for response rate (A), latency (B), completion time (C), and number of meal, snack, and drink reports (D) across individual days of the study. The response rate and latency graphs combine data from all countries. The completion time graph includes data only from Germany and Czechia, as daily surveys in France and Ireland might or might not include reports of meals, snacks, and drinks. The graph of the number of meal, snack, and drink reports combines data for all types of reports from all countries.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Bull FC, Al-Ansari SS, Biddle S, Borodulin K, Buman MP, Cardon G, et al.. World Health Organization 2020 guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour. Brit J Sport Med. 2020;54: 1451–1462. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2020-102955 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cena H, Calder PC. Defining a Healthy Diet: Evidence for the Role of Contemporary Dietary Patterns in Health and Disease. Nutrients. 2020;12: 334. doi: 10.3390/nu12020334 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rosas LG, Mensink GBM, Finger JD, Schienkiewitz A, Do S, Wolters M, et al.. Selection of key indicators for European policy monitoring and surveillance for dietary behaviour, physical activity and sedentary behaviour. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2021;18: 48. doi: 10.1186/s12966-021-01111-0 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Troiano RP, Stamatakis E, Bull FC. How can global physical activity surveillance adapt to evolving physical activity guidelines? Needs, challenges and future directions. Brit J Sport Med. 2020;54: 1468–1473. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2020-102621 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Strain T, Wijndaele K, Dempsey PC, Sharp SJ, Pearce M, Jeon J, et al.. Wearable-device-measured physical activity and future health risk. Nat Med. 2020;26: 1385–1391. doi: 10.1038/s41591-020-1012-3 - DOI - PMC - PubMed