Evidence Hub

The Application of AI to Ecological Momentary Assessment Data in Suicide Research: Systematic Review

Ruth Melia, Katherine Musacchio Schafer, M. L. Rogers, Emma Wilson-Lemoine, Thomas E. Joiner

Journal of Medical Internet Research, 2025

4,398 participants · 10 citations

Abstract

Background Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) captures dynamic processes suitable to the study of suicidal ideation and behaviors. Artificial intelligence (AI) has increasingly been applied to EMA data in the study of suicidal processes. Objective This review aims to (1) synthesize empirical research applying AI strategies to EMA data in the study of suicidal ideation and behaviors; (2) identify methodologies and data collection procedures used, suicide outcomes studied, AI applied, and results reported; and (3) develop a standardized reporting framework for researchers applying AI to EMA data in the future. Methods PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, and Embase were searched for published articles applying AI to EMA data in the investigation of suicide outcomes. The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines were used to identify studies while minimizing bias. Quality appraisal was performed using CREMAS (adapted STROBE [Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology] Checklist for Reporting Ecological Momentary Assessment Studies). Results In total, 1201 records were identified across databases. After a full-text review, 12 (1%) articles, comprising 4398 participants, were included. In the application of AI to EMA data to predict suicidal ideation, studies reported mean area under the curve (0.74-0.86), sensitivity (0.64-0.81), specificity (0.73-0.86), and positive predictive values (0.72-0.77). Studies met between…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 4,398 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free