Background and Aims While there are considerable benefits to Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA), poor compliance with assessment protocols has been identified as a limitation, particularly in substance users. Our aim was to identify the pooled compliance rate of EMA studies in substance users and examine variables that may influence compliance with EMA protocols, such as the length and frequency of assessments. Design A meta‐analysis and meta‐regression of all possible studies (randomized controlled trials and longitudinal) which incorporated EMA protocols, examining substance use. Setting Studies took place from 1998 to 2017, in numerous countries world‐wide. Participants One hundred and twenty‐six studies were identified, contributing a total of 19 431 participants (52.32% male, mean age = 28.86). Measurements Compliance data, the proportion of responses to the study protocol, were extracted from each study alongside prompt frequency, total length of assessment period, substance use population and device used to administer EMA prompts. Findings The pooled compliance rate across all studies was 75.06% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 72.37%, 77.65%]. There was no evidence that compliance rates were significantly associated with prompt frequency [Q(3) = 7.35, P = 0.061], length of assessment period [Q(2) = 2.40, P = 0.301], substance type [Q(3) = 6.30, P = 0.098] or device administration [Q(4) = 4.28, P = 0.369]. However, dependent samples (69.80%) had lower compliance rates than non‐dependent samples [76.02%; Q(1) = 4.13, P = 0.042]. Conclusions The pooled compliance rate for Ecological Momentary Assessment studies in substance‐using populations from 1998 to 2017 was lower than the recommended rate of 80%, and was not associated with frequency or duration of assessments.

There is growing interest in non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) as a novel treatment option for substance-use disorders (SUDs). Recent momentum stems from a foundation of preclinical neuroscience demonstrating links between neural circuits and drug consuming behavior, as well as recent FDA-approval of NIBS treatments for mental health disorders that share overlapping pathology with SUDs. As with any emerging field, enthusiasm must be tempered by reason; lessons learned from the past should be prudently applied to future therapies. Here, an international ensemble of experts provides an overview of the state of transcranial-electrical (tES) and transcranial-magnetic (TMS) stimulation applied in SUDs. This consensus paper provides a systematic literature review on published data-emphasizing the heterogeneity of methods and outcome measures while suggesting strategies to help bridge knowledge gaps. The goal of this effort is to provide the community with guidelines for best practices in tES/TMS SUD research. We hope this will accelerate the speed at which the community translates basic neuroscience into advanced neuromodulation tools for clinical practice in addiction medicine.

No abstract

No abstract

Introduction: Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) methods allow for real-time data collection in naturalistic environments, and are particularly informative for the examination of substance use which is both time and context dependent. Whilst there are considerable benefits to EMA, poor compliance to assessment protocols has been identified as a limitation, particularly in substance users. Little research has analysed factors which might influence compliance. Methods: The aim of this meta-analysis was to systematically review and meta-analyse potential variables that may influence compliance to EMA protocols in substance users; such as, prompt frequency, total length of assessment period, substance use population and device used to administer EMA prompts. We pre-registered our design, hypotheses and analysis strategy. Results: Following systematic searches of relevant databases we identified k = 128 reported compliance rates in the literature. The pooled compliance rate across all studies was 78.68% (95% CI 76.53%, 80.69%). There was no evidence that any proposed moderators were associated with compliance rates; prompt frequency (Q(3) = 0.98, p = .805) length of assessment period (Q(2) = 1.42, p = .493), substance use population (Q(1) = 1.830, p = .176) or device administration (Q(3) = 4.715, p =.194). Conclusions: The overall compliance rate was similar to that of other fields and recommended rates of compliance (80%), although compliance was not associated with any procedural variables. Furthermore, we identified various limitations in reporting of compliance data and improvement is needed to further elucidate factors which might influence compliance. These findings suggest intensive real-time data collection techniques can be administered in substance using populations, despite previous concerns.