Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

This figure shows the average number of beeps that were completed per day per subject, both for the baseline assessment and the three-month follow-up assessment, over the 6 day ESM period.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

This figure shows the average number of responded beeps, per time window, within a day.

(A) Number of beep responses within the day, derived from baseline ESM data. (B) Number of beep responses within the day, derived from the three-month follow-up ESM data.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Table 1.

Pearson correlates between positive affect scores, negative affect scores and hamilton anxiety and depression scale scores.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Multilevel regression model estimates for the effects of measurement period on several variables.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 3.

This figure is an example of the PsyMate™ ESM feedback, provided on a dedicated website with choice of ‘contextual’ or ‘functional’ analysis.

The data (here five consecutive days) are displayed over time (here clustered in dayparts; morning, afternoon …). Aggregated Likert scores of the scale items (here positive- and negative affect is selected) reflect the mental state at the time points. What and Who pie charts display the time budgets for the sampling period. In an interactive feedback meeting with the patient, the clinician can select options of the pie chart to break down the subject’s responses and assess whether mental states are contextualized (subject feels better in one situation, compared to the other) or zoom in on specific moments, that reflect vulnerability (crisis) or resilience (coping).

More »

Fig 3 Expand