English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background:  Implementing ecological momentary assessment (EMA) methodology to evaluate the substance use disorder (SUD) treatment pipeline has clear advantages, including learning about participants’ day-to-day experiences to aid in the improvement of services and accessibility for those seeking treatment. Given that the SUD treatment pipeline spans long periods of time, EMA burst designs (deployment of multiple short EMA periods spread over time) can be advantageous for evaluating the treatment pipeline over time while keeping participant burden low. Objectives:  This feasibility study describes (1) the process and study design of implementing EMA burst methodology to evaluate the SUD treatment pipeline experience; (2) study implementation from the perspective of researchers, including discussion of collaboration with community partners; and (3) participant feedback on the experience of engaging with this type of research. Method:  EMA metrics, feasibility ratings, and general experience ratings in the study are presented from 22 participants (64% women) who participated in a parent EMA study evaluating the SUD treatment pipeline and 8 who provided feedback in a follow-up survey. Results:  Participants found the EMA burst design to be acceptable and not burdensome, although technology issues were present for some participants. Steps to partnering with community treatment programs and implementation of a burst design are outlined. Conclusions:  Strategies and recommendations for implementation of an EMA burst study with community partners are provided, including aspects of study design, technology issues, retention, and funding.

Implementing an EMA burst design in community-engaged research: participant and researcher perspectives and recommendations