Citation

Esposito EC, Duan AM, Kearns JC, Kleiman EM, Conwell Y, Glenn CR. Res. Child Adolesc. Psychopathol. 2022; ePub(ePub): ePub.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2022, Holtzbrinck Springer Nature Publishing Group)

DOI

10.1007/s10802-022-00907-3

PMID

35254573

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare adolescents' reports of self-injurious thoughts and behaviors (SITBs) between ecological momentary assessment (EMA) and a traditional, retrospective interview. Adolescents were recruited following recent discharge from acute psychiatric care for a suicidal crisis (as part of a larger study). Participants completed: (1) EMA surveys assessing SITBs multiple times daily over a 28-day follow-up period, and (2) a follow-up phone interview to evaluate SITBs retrospectively at the end of the same 28-day follow-up period. Forty-one adolescents completed the final follow-up interview (M(age) = 14.9 years; 78.0% White; 61.0% female). Adolescents' reports of SITB presence (vs. absence) and frequency, collected via EMA and retrospective interview over follow-up, were compared. Preliminary differences in SITB endorsement (presence/absence) were observed between reporting methods with more adolescents endorsing suicide ideation (SI; n = 30) and nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI; n = 15) in EMA compared to retrospective interview (SI: n = 17; NSSI: n = 10). Reasons for withholding SITBs from EMA reports (gathered during a final qualitative interview) included not wanting to answer additional EMA questions and concerns about EMA-reporting consequences. There were no statistically significant differences in SITB frequency by report method. Further investigation is warranted in a larger sample to elucidate frequency patterns. Given the growing research using this method, these findings are important to help clarify the utility of EMA methods for studying SITBs in youth.

Language: en

Keywords

Adolescents; Nonsuicidal self-injury; Ecological momentary assessment; Self-injurious thoughts and behaviors