Advertisement

BMC Research Notes

, 12:791 | Cite as

Use of ecological momentary assessment to detect variability in mood, sleep and stress in bipolar disorder

  • Han Li
  • Dahlia Mukherjee
  • Venkatesh Basappa Krishnamurthy
  • Caitlin Millett
  • Kelly A. Ryan
  • Lijun Zhang
  • Erika F. H. Saunders
  • Ming WangEmail author
Open Access
Research note

Abstract

Objective

Our aim was to study within-person variability in mood, cognition, energy, and impulsivity measured in an Ecological Momentary Assessment paradigm in bipolar disorder by using modern statistical techniques. Exploratory analyses tested the relationship between bipolar disorder symptoms and hours of sleep, and levels of pain, social and task-based stress. We report an analysis of data from a two-arm, parallel group study (bipolar disorder group N = 10 and healthy control group N = 10, with 70% completion rate of 14-day surveys). Surveys of bipolar disorder symptoms, social stressors and sleep hours were completed on a smartphone at unexpected times in an Ecological Momentary Assessment paradigm twice a day. Multi-level models adjusted for potential subject heterogeneity were adopted to test the difference between the bipolar disorder and health control groups.

Results

Within-person variability of mood, energy, speed of thoughts, impulsivity, pain and perception of skill of tasks was significantly higher in the bipolar disorder group compared to health controls. Elevated bipolar disorder symptom domains in the evening were associated with reduced sleep time that night. Stressors were associated with worsening of bipolar disorder symptoms. Detection of symptoms when an individual is experiencing difficulty allows personalized, focused interventions.

Keywords

Multilevel models Subject heterogeneity Ecological Momentary Assessment Mood disorders Mania Affective disorders 

Abbreviations

EMA

Ecological Momentary Assessment

BD

bipolar disorder

HC

healthy control

IRB

Institutional review board

MINI 5.0

Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview, version 5.0

DREAM

Dynamic Real-Time Ecological Ambulatory Methodologies

Introduction

Bipolar disorders (BD) are episodic, recurrent brain disorders characterized by manic (BD type I) or hypomanic (BD type II) episodes and depressive episodes causing disturbances in mood, motivation, hedonic capacity, activity levels, sleep, energy and judgment that impair functioning [1]. In the United States, approximately 1–4% of the population is affected by BD [2]. Diagnosis of BD, as with other psychiatric disorders, relies largely on self-report of symptoms [1, 3], however, it is difficult for individuals to recall mood symptoms, and recall may be influenced by current mood state [4].

Most people with BD suffer from subsyndromal symptoms between manic and depressive episodes [5]. The presence of subsyndromal symptoms has been shown to increase the likelihood of emergence of a mood episode [6, 7, 8], and variability in mood symptoms has been associated with deficits in emotional processing [9], and functional impairment [10, 11]. The temporal relationship between variables thought to affect mood such as sleep disturbance and psychosocial stress are important in determining the associated risk factors. Such patient-reported data on sleep and psychosocial stressors can help determine when to intervene to prevent the development of a mood episode [12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17]. However, in the literature, the relationship between sleep and mood is not clear. For instance, in several longitudinal studies, longer sleep onset latency, longer wakefulness after sleep onset and lower sleep efficiency have been associated with higher negative affect in BD [14]. However, an experimental design to alter evening mood prior to sleep showed that induction of happy mood prior to sleep onset created a shorter sleep onset latency in the HC group, but not in BD group, a phenomenon perhaps akin to what we see in the naturalistic setting [18].

Through technological advancements, daily self-reporting of mood and behavior is more easily recorded than in the past and provides valuable information on symptoms during daily life than traditional research methods [19]. Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) is a methodology allowing participants to report on phenomena close in time to when symptoms are experienced and to document several events or time periods, often in 1 day [16, 17, 20, 21]. In previous studies on EMA, technologies such as smart phones and computers have been used effectively to gather data in patients with BD [22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27]. In our prior study, we tested the feasibility of using EMA ratings collected for 14 days by smartphones with 70% completion rate of daily EMA surveys in BD and HC participants [28]. In the present work, we perform a secondary analysis using data from this prior study to conduct multi-level models adjusted for potential subject heterogeneity, and extend our findings.

Main text

Design, sample and measures

The research was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the Hershey Medical Center (PSU COM IRB # 00251, Approval 3/28/2014). This study protocol was designed to test the compliance of individuals in a BD and an HC group on completion of twice-daily mood and stress, and once daily sleep measures on a Motorola Droid RazrM smartphone provided to the subjects for the study for 14 days. The feasibility outcomes of the study have been described previously [28]. The participants were screened over the phone, then seen in person for one visit. During that visit, the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), version 5.0 [29] was completed, demographic data collected and the participants were instructed on the use of the smartphone.

The twice-daily mood and stress survey measures included single item questions rating mood, energy, speed of thoughts, impulsivity, and physical pain on a visual analogue scale. Mood was described to the participants as being positive/negative valance of subjective experience. Note that the measurement of mood is of the subjective experience and not of a diagnosed mood episode. Two questions assessing the current and preferred social situation (alone/with others) were assessed along a Likert scale. Task-based stress was measured through three questions assessing perception of skill, effort and preference of tasks on a Likert scale. Once daily, in the morning, the participants entered the time to bed the previous night, time to sleep the previous night, number of awakenings, final time of waking, and time out of bed. More details about the enrollment criteria and data structure can be referred to Additional file 1.

Statistical analysis

Within-subject variability in BD symptoms

We tested the primary hypothesis that within-subject variability in the core BD symptoms of mood valance, speed of thoughts, energy and impulsivity was greater in the BD group than in the HC group. First, we calculated the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for each group to examine the relative magnitude of between-person versus within-person variation. Then, we tested the level-1 heterogeneity of variance with the null hypothesis of no individual differences in within-person variation [30, 31]. Lastly, multilevel models were further applied to analyze the variation in BD symptoms and stressors between the BD and HC groups [32].

Evaluation of the associations between BD symptoms and sleep time

To analyze the associations between core BD symptoms and sleep time, we answered the following questions: (I) are the core BD symptoms affected by prior nights’ sleep duration, and does the effect last more than 1 day? (II) Are core BD symptoms during the day affecting that night’s total sleep time, and does this effect last more than one night? Two analyses using the morning and evening measures of the core BD symptoms were conducted with details shown in Additional file 1. Similar multilevel models described above were fitted with the variables of age, gender, employment status, time (days), group (1 = BD; 0 = HC), sleep time/BD symptoms as well as the interactions between group and sleep time/BD symptom (if not significant, excluded for the final model) included as fixed effects.

Evaluation of effects of pain and social stress on BD symptoms

To analyze the association between pain or social and task-based stressors (i.e., social stress, perception of skill) and core BD symptoms, we adopted similar models above with BD symptoms as longitudinal outcomes, and the pain or social stressors were included as time-varying covariates with fixed effects. The other variables including group (1 = BD; 0 = HC), age, gender, employment status and time (days) as well as the interaction of group and the pain or social stressors (if not significant, were excluded for the final model) were also considered as fixed effects.

The strategies to handle small sample size are provided in Additional file 1. All hypotheses tests are two-sided with the significance level of 0.05. Data was analyzed using SAS 9.4 Software with the MIXED Procedure.

Results

All BD participants were diagnosed with BD, type I. The groups did not differ significantly based on age, gender and employment status (p > 0.05).

Within-subject variability in BD symptoms (Table 1)

Table 1 summarizes the analysis of distribution and difference in within-person and between-person variability between the BD group and HC group in BD core symptoms, stressors and pain (i.e., the ICC for mood in the BD group is 0.55, indicating 55% between-person variation and 45% within-person variability). For multilevel models, no significant fixed effects for time were found. Overall, higher within-person variabilities in core BD symptoms as well as pain and perception of skill were shown in the BD group compared to the HC group (Table 1). There were no group differences in the mean scores of speed of thoughts, impulsivity, social stress, perception of skill, effort or task preference. The significant results above remained same after correction for multiple testing, thus original p-values are presented.
Table 1

Variability of BD symptoms and stressors between BD and HC groups over the 14-day period

 

ICC

Estimates of group effect on within-person variability (α1)

p-value for group effect on within-person variabilitya

Estimates of between-group difference the mean level of symptoms or stressors (γ01)

p-value for between-group difference in the mean level of symptoms or stressorsb

Mood

 BD

0.55

0.86

< 0.0001

− 18.42

0.015

 HC

0.72

    

Energy

 BD

0.49

1.02

< 0.0001

− 20.99

0.006

 HC

0.61

    

Speed of thoughts

 BD

0.40

1.73

< 0.0001

− 0.10

0.99

 HC

0.67

    

Impulsivity

 BD

0.16

0.89

< 0.0001

13.42

0.07

 HC

0.68

    

Pain

 BD

0.80

1.64

< 0.0001

38.75

0.001

 HC

0.40

    

Social stress

 BD

0.20

0.03

0.85

0.61

0.06

 HC

0.02

    

Perception of skill

 BD

0.23

0.65

< 0.0001

0.84

0.05

 HC

0.54

    

Effort

 BD

0.12

0.10

0.50

0.28

0.53

 HC

0.23

    

Preference of tasks

 BD

0.13

0.06

0.68

0.48

0.17

 HC

0.11

    

Sleep (h)

 BD

0.46

0.73

< 0.0001

− 0.67

0.27

 HC

0.30

    

ICC intraclass correlation coefficient

aThe p-values for group effect on within-person variability

bThe p-values for between-group difference in the mean level of symptoms or stressors. Significant results are in italic

Evaluation of the associations between BD symptoms and sleep time (Table 2)

The effect of the prior hours of sleep on BD symptoms in the morning of the index day across 13 days were examined with no significant results (Additional file 1: Table S1, p > 0.05). Also, we tested the effect of evening symptoms on total hours of sleep for the same night (Model 1) and the same night plus the subsequent night (Model 2). Evening mood symptoms had a negative relationship to sleep, indicating elevated mood was associated with a decrease in sleep hours in the subsequent night (p = 0.03). The same effect was found for energy (p = 0.04). Elevated speed of speed of thoughts and impulsivity were associated with decreased sleep for the next night only (p < 0.05).
Table 2

The associations between core BD evening symptoms during/before each day and that night’s sleep time

Variable

Final selected model

Estimate

SE

p-value

BD

− 1.79

0.84

0.04

T mood

− 0.01

0.01

0.16

T−1 mood

− 0.02

0.01

0.03

BD

− 0.31

0.61

0.62

T speed of thoughts

− 0.02

0.01

0.01

T−1 speed of thoughts

BD

− 1.78

0.90

0.07

T energy

− 0.02

0.01

0.01

T−1 energy

− 0.01

0.01

0.04

BD

− 0.25

0.66

0.70

T impulsivity

− 0.01

0.01

0.049

T−1 impulsivity

Model 1 includes the daily core BD evening symptoms during each index day (T); Model 2 includes both the daily core BD evening symptoms during the index day and the day before the index day (T−1). Both models are final selected models from two candidate models, which are adjusted for age, gender, employment status, time (days) and the interactions between BD group (not included if not significant). Significant results are in italic

Evaluation of effects of pain and social stress on BD symptoms (Table 3)

We evaluated the effect of pain, social stress, perception of skill, effort and task-preference on mood symptoms at the same time point. Mood (Table 3A) was associated inversely with pain, and positively with task preference; mood was not associated with social stress, task effort or skill. Elevated energy (Table 3B) was associated with lower perceived skill, however, elevated energy was also associated with effort, indicating that greater effort on a task and greater energy were associated in time. Energy was not associated with pain, task preference or social stress. Increased speed of thoughts (Table 3C) was associated with lower perceived skill, but not with pain, task effort, task preference or social stress. Greater impulsivity (Table 3D) was associated with less pain, lower perception of skill, and higher social stress in the BD group, but not associated with task effort or task preference.
Table 3

The association of pain or social stressors with core BD symptoms at the same timepoint

A. Mood

Estimate

SE

p-value

B. Energy

Estimate

SE

p-value

BD

− 15.82

7.30

0.04

BD

− 12.72

7.27

0.09

Pain

− 0.12

0.05

0.01

Pain

0.06

0.15

0.67

BD * pain

   

BD * pain

− 0.30

0.16

0.06

BD

− 20.06

7.11

0.01

BD

− 23.19

6.93

0.003

Skill

− 0.97

0.57

0.09

Skill

− 1.48

0.66

0.03

BD * skill

   

BD * skill

   

BD

− 20.94

7.10

0.01

BD

− 25.03

6.86

0.002

Effort

0.07

0.33

0.82

Effort

1.29

0.37

0.001

BD * effort

   

BD * effort

   

BD

− 30.03

7.73

0.001

BD

− 24.63

6.97

0.002

Preference

− 0.51

0.53

0.34

Preference

0.29

0.42

0.50

BD * preference

2.19

0.72

0.003

BD * preference

   

BD

− 20.91

7.10

0.01

BD

− 24.39

6.97

0.002

Social stress

− 0.005

0.40

0.99

Social stress

− 0.10

0.47

0.82

BD * social stress

   

BD * social stress

   

C. Speed of thoughts

Estimate

SE

p-value

D. Impulsivity

Estimate

SE

p-value

BD

3.45

7.46

0.65

BD

16.62

7.97

0.048

Pain

− 0.10

0.06

0.10

Pain

0.68

0.19

< 0.001

BD * pain

   

BD * pain

− 0.72

0.20

< 0.001

BD

0.62

6.69

0.93

BD

21.11

7.97

0.01

Skill

− 1.49

0.71

0.04

Skill

2.68

1.46

0.07

BD * skill

   

BD * skill

− 4.66

1.77

0.01

BD

− 1.01

6.51

0.88

BD

11.27

7.37

0.14

Effort

0.77

0.41

0.06

Effort

− 0.29

0.48

0.55

BD * effort

BD * effort

   

BD

− 0.74

6.60

0.91

BD

11.42

7.36

0.14

Preference

0.08

0.46

0.85

Preference

− 0.40

0.54

0.46

BD * preference

BD * preference

   

BD

− 0.84

6.60

0.90

BD

1.62

8.12

0.84

Social stress

0.27

0.50

0.59

Social stress

− 2.20

0.86

0.01

BD * social stress

BD * social stress

3.18

1.17

0.007

A. mood, B. energy, C. speed of thoughts, D. impulsivity. Thoughts: speed of thoughts; Skill: perception of skill; Preference: preference of tasks. All models are adjusted for age, adjusted for age, gender, employment status, time (days). Significant results are in italic

Discussion

In this analysis, we illustrated how extensions of multilevel models could be used to analyze EMA for valid and informative inference, and found significantly elevated within-person variability in core BD symptoms including mood, energy, speed of thoughts, and impulsivity in the BD group when compared to the HC group. The EMA method allows for gathering the daily variability of mood and related symptoms in BD [25, 26, 27, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37]. Traditional methods of assessment ask participants to retrospectively reflect upon mood symptoms over a period of time, and do not always reflect the instability of mood and functioning, which is disruptive to patients. Our study highlights that not only absolute differences in mood states, but also within-subject mood variation over time, can be captured using EMA techniques in patients with BD.

This study results allowed us to look at the effect of self-reported hours of sleep on symptoms the next day. We found that the total hours of sleep reported did not affect symptoms the following day in BD subjects, elevated evening mood, energy and impulsivity were associated with reduced sleep on that night. Our study used a different scale to measure mood, and thus may have captured different facets of this core symptom. Additionally, we measured mood only subjectively and did not have an objective measure that can include physical signs of affect.

We also found that low mood was associated with pain, and elevated mood was associated with more enjoyment of tasks. Increased speed of thoughts and elevated energy were associated with lower perceived skill, which may indicate impairment, though we did not measure impairment directly. Impulsivity was associated with less pain, lower perception of skill and higher social stress in the BD group. Proximal stressful life events have been shown to negatively affect sleep in inter-episode BD [38], and responses to negative events were more stressful for those with BD than HC, which was associated with higher cortisol levels [18, 39]. Detection of changes related to stressors through smartphone technology between office visits or encounters with the health care team may allow for the opportunity to intervene and prevent mood episodes.

Through the use of EMA, we detected daily variability in BD symptoms and associations between daily mood, energy, and impulsivity symptoms in BD, sleep and daily stressors. Further exploration of the proximal relationship between daily stressors, sleep and mood is needed.

Limitations

There are some limitations to this study. This study was designed to demonstrate feasibility; therefore, the sample size was small. In future studies, we will extend our study period in a larger sample, which is ongoing now. This report does not address the psychometric properties of the items. Also, certain biases and confounding factors are still present when using smart phones to capture data, which needs more exploration.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the patients and families that made this study possible. In addition, we acknowledge the Penn State Clinical & Translational Research Institute and Pennsylvania State University for providing funding this project.

Authors’ contributions

HL analyzed the data and wrote the first draft of the paper. DM, VK, CM, and KR made substantial contributions to the analysis and interpretation of the data; LZ made substantial contributions to methods review, the analysis the data and table generations in particular for paper revision; ES made substantial contributions to the conception and design, acquisition of data and analysis and interpretation of data; MW made substantial contributions to the conception and design, analysis and interpretation of data. All authors were involved in revising the manuscript critically, all gave final approval of the version to be published, and all agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding

This publication (or project) was supported by the Penn State Clinical & Translational Research Institute, Pennsylvania State University CTSA, NIH/NCATS Grant Number UL1 TR000127 and UL1 TR002014. The contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH or NCATS. The funding agencies were not involved with the design of the study and collection, analysis, and interpretation of data and in writing the manuscript.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The research was approved by the institutional review board (IRB) at the Hershey Medical Center (PSU COM IRB # 00251, approval 3/28/2014), and written consent was obtained from each participant.

Consent to publish

Not applicable.

Competing interests

HL, DM, VK reports no conflicts. CM receives salary support through the Sackler Scholars in Psychobiology Program. KR has received grant funding through National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number 2KL2TR000434, the Heinz C. Prechter Research Program, and the Richard Tam Foundation. LZ has received grant funding from the Pennsylvania State University, Penn State Clinical and Translational Science Institute and the National Institutes of Health. ES receives a stipend from the Journal of Clinical Psychiatry for an associate editorship, and has received grant funding from the National Institutes of Health and the Stanley Medical Research Institute. MW has received grant funding from the Pennsylvania State University, Pennsylvania Department of Health, Penn State Clinical and Translational Science Institute, Grant No. KL2 TR 126-4, the National Institutes of Health, BioAdvance, and the Children’s Miracle Network at Penn State.

Supplementary material

13104_2019_4834_MOESM1_ESM.docx (59 kb)
Additional file 1. More detailed information on study enrollment, data structure and statistical analysis.

References

  1. 1.
    APA. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-5. 5th ed. Washington, D.C.: American Psychiatric Association; 2013.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Merikangas KR, Akiskal HS, Angst J, Greenberg PE, Hirschfeld RM, Petukhova M, Kessler RC. Lifetime and 12-month prevalence of bipolar spectrum disorder in the National Comorbidity Survey replication. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2007;64(5):543–52.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Harding KJ, Rush AJ, Arbuckle M, Trivedi MH, Pincus HA. Measurement-based care in psychiatric practice: a policy framework for implementation. J Clin Psychiatry. 2011;72(8):1136–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ghaemi SN. Feeling and time: the phenomenology of mood disorders, depressive realism, and existential psychotherapy. Schizophr Bull. 2007;33(1):122–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Judd LL, Akiskal HS, Schettler PJ, Endicott J, Maser J, Solomon DA, Leon AC, Rice JA, Keller MB. The long-term natural history of the weekly symptomatic status of bipolar I disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2002;59(6):530–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bauer M, Glenn T, Grof P, Schmid R, Pfennig A, Whybrow PC. Subsyndromal mood symptoms: a useful concept for maintenance studies of bipolar disorder? Psychopathology. 2010;43(1):1–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Judd LL, Akiskal HS, Schettler PJ, Endicott J, Leon AC, Solomon DA, Coryell W, Maser JD, Keller MB. Psychosocial disability in the course of bipolar I and II disorders: a prospective, comparative, longitudinal study. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005;62(12):1322–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Perlis RH, Ostacher MJ, Patel JK, Marangell LB, Zhang H, Wisniewski SR, Ketter TA, Miklowitz DJ, Otto MW, Gyulai L, et al. Predictors of recurrence in bipolar disorder: primary outcomes from the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for Bipolar Disorder (STEP-BD). Am J Psychiatry. 2006;163(2):217–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bilderbeck AC, Reed ZE, McMahon HC, Atkinson LZ, Price J, Geddes JR, Goodwin GM, Harmer CJ. Associations between mood instability and emotional processing in a large cohort of bipolar patients. Psychol Med. 2016;46(15):3151–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Simon GE, Bauer MS, Ludman EJ, Operskalski BH, Unutzer J. Mood symptoms, functional impairment, and disability in people with bipolar disorder: specific effects of mania and depression. J Clin Psychiatry. 2007;68(8):1237–45.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Proudfoot J, Whitton AE, Parker G, Manicavasagar V, Nicholas J, Smith M. Evidence of weekly cyclicity in mood and functional impairment in those with a bipolar disorder. Psychiatry Res. 2014;218(3):290–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Saunders EF, Fernandez-Mendoza J, Kamali M, Assari S, McInnis MG. The effect of poor sleep quality on mood outcome differs between men and women: a longitudinal study of bipolar disorder. J Affect Disord. 2015;180:90–6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Saunders EF, Novick DM, Fernandez-Mendoza J, Kamali M, Ryan KA, Langenecker SA, Gelenberg AJ, McInnis MG. Sleep quality during euthymia in bipolar disorder: the role of clinical features, personality traits, and stressful life events. Int J Bipolar Disord. 2013;1(16):16.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gershon A, Thompson WK, Eidelman P, McGlinchey EL, Kaplan KA, Harvey AG. Restless pillow, ruffled mind: sleep and affect coupling in interepisode bipolar disorder. J Abnorm Psychol. 2012;121(4):863–73.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gruber J, Miklowitz DJ, Harvey AG, Frank E, Kupfer D, Thase ME, Sachs GS, Ketter TA. Sleep matters: sleep functioning and course of illness in bipolar disorder. J Affect Disord. 2011;134(1–3):416–20.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Myin-Germeys I, Oorschot M, Collip D, Lataster J, Delespaul P, van Os J. Experience sampling research in psychopathology: opening the black box of daily life. Psychol Med. 2009;39(9):1533–47.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Myin-Germeys I, Peeters F, Havermans R, Nicolson NA, DeVries MW, Delespaul P, Van Os J. Emotional reactivity to daily life stress in psychosis and affective disorder: an experience sampling study. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2003;107(2):124–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Havermans R, Nicolson NA, Berkhof J, deVries MW. Patterns of salivary cortisol secretion and responses to daily events in patients with remitted bipolar disorder. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2011;36(2):258–65.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    aan het Rot M, Hogenelst K, Schoevers RA. Mood disorders in everyday life: a systematic review of experience sampling and ecological momentary assessment studies. Clin Psychol Rev. 2012;32(6):510–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shiffman S, Stone AA, Hufford MR. Ecological momentary assessment. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2008;4:1–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Moskowitz DS, Young SN. Ecological momentary assessment: what it is and why it is a method of the future in clinical psychopharmacology. J Psychiatry Neurosci. 2006;31(1):13–20.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bauer M, Grof P, Gyulai L, Rasgon N, Glenn T, Whybrow PC. Using technology to improve longitudinal studies: self-reporting with ChronoRecord in bipolar disorder. Bipolar Disord. 2004;6(1):67–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bauer M, Rasgon N, Grof P, Gyulai L, Glenn T, Whybrow PC. Does the use of an automated tool for self-reporting mood by patients with bipolar disorder bias the collected data? MedGenMed. 2005;7(3):21.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Miklowitz DJ, Price J, Holmes EA, Rendell J, Bell S, Budge K, Christensen J, Wallace J, Simon J, Armstrong NM, et al. Facilitated Integrated Mood Management for adults with bipolar disorder. Bipolar Disord. 2012;14(2):185–97.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Faurholt-Jepsen M, Vinberg M, Christensen EM, Frost M, Bardram J, Kessing LV. Daily electronic self-monitoring of subjective and objective symptoms in bipolar disorder—the MONARCA trial protocol (MONitoring, treAtment and pRediCtion of bipolAr disorder episodes): a randomised controlled single-blind trial. BMJ Open. 2013.  https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003353.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Depp CA, Ceglowski J, Wang VC, Yaghouti F, Mausbach BT, Thompson WK, Granholm EL. Augmenting psychoeducation with a mobile intervention for bipolar disorder: a randomized controlled trial. J Affect Disord. 2015;174:23–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Depp CA, Kim DH, de Dios LV, Wang V, Ceglowski J. A pilot study of mood ratings captured by mobile phone versus paper-and-pencil mood charts in bipolar disorder. J Dual Diagn. 2012;8(4):326–32.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Schwartz S, Schultz S, Reider A, Saunders EF. Daily mood monitoring of symptoms using smartphones in bipolar disorder: a pilot study assessing the feasibility of ecological momentary assessment. J Affect Disord. 2016;191:88–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sheehan DV, Lecrubier Y, Sheehan KH, Amorim P, Janavs J, Weiller E, Hergueta T, Baker R, Dunbar GC. The Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (M.I.N.I.): the development and validation of a structured diagnostic psychiatric interview for DSM-IV and ICD-10. J Clin Psychiatry. 1998;59(Suppl 20):22–33 (quiz 34–57).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Snijders TAB, Bosker RJ. Multilevel analysis: an introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. 2nd ed. Los Angeles: Sage; 2012.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Raudenbush SW, Bryk AS. Hierarchical linear models: applications and data analysis methods. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2002.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hoffman L. Multilevel models for examining individual differences in within-person variation and covariation over time. Multivar Behav Res. 2007;42(4):609–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Faurholt-Jepsen M, Brage S, Vinberg M, Jensen HM, Christensen EM, Knorr U, Kessing LV. Electronic monitoring of psychomotor activity as a supplementary objective measure of depression severity. Nord J Psychiatry. 2015;69(2):118–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Faurholt-Jepsen M, Vinberg M, Frost M, Christensen E, Bardram J, Kessing L. Daily electronic monitoring of subjective and objective measures of illness activity in bipolar disorder using smartphones inverted question mark the MONARCA II trial protocol: a randomized controlled single-blind parallel-group trial. BMC Psychiatry. 2014;14(1):309.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Faurholt-Jepsen M, Frost M, Vinberg M, Christensen EM, Bardram JE, Kessing LV. Smartphone data as objective measures of bipolar disorder symptoms. Psychiatry Res. 2014;217(1–2):124–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Thompson WK, Gershon A, O’Hara R, Bernert RA, Depp CA. The prediction of study-emergent suicidal ideation in bipolar disorder: a pilot study using ecological momentary assessment data. Bipolar Disord. 2014;16(7):669–77.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Depp CA, Mausbach B, Granholm E, Cardenas V, Ben-Zeev D, Patterson TL, Lebowitz BD, Jeste DV. Mobile interventions for severe mental illness: design and preliminary data from three approaches. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2010;198(10):715–21.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Saunders EF, Novick DM, Fernandez-Mendoza J, Kamali M, Ryan KA, Langenecker SA, Gelenberg AJ, McInnis MG. Sleep quality during euthymia in bipolar disorder: the role of clinical features, personality traits, and stressful life events. Int J Bipolar Disord. 2013;1:16.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Havermans R, Nicolson NA, Berkhof J, deVries MW. Mood reactivity to daily events in patients with remitted bipolar disorder. Psychiatry Res. 2010;179(1):47–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Public Health SciencePenn State College of Medicine, Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical CenterHersheyUSA
  2. 2.Department of PsychiatryPenn State College of Medicine, Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical CenterHersheyUSA
  3. 3.Department of PsychiatryUniversity of Michigan Medical SchoolAnn ArborUSA
  4. 4.Institute of Personalized MedicinePenn State College of Medicine, Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical CenterHersheyUSA

Personalised recommendations