Acceptability and feasibility of mobile phone-based ecological momentary assessment and intervention in Uganda: A pilot randomized controlled trial

Valid, reliable behavioral data and contextually meaningful interventions are necessary for improved health outcomes. Ecological Momentary Assessment and Intervention (EMAI), which collects data as behaviors occur to deliver real-time interventions, may be more accurate and reliable than retrospective methods. The rapid expansion of mobile technologies in low-and-middle-income countries allows for unprecedented remote data collection and intervention opportunities. However, no previous studies have trialed EMAI in sub-Saharan Africa. We assessed EMAI acceptability and feasibility, including participant retention and response rate, in a prospective, parallel group, randomized pilot trial in Rakai, Uganda comparing behavioral outcomes among adults submitting ecological momentary assessments (EMA) versus EMAI. After training, participants submitted EMA data on five nutrition and health risk behaviors over a 90-day period using a smartphone-based application utilizing prompt-based, participant-initiated, and geospatial coordinate data collection, with study coordinator support and incentives for >50% completion. Included behaviors and associated EMAI-arm intervention messages were selected to pilot a range of EMAI applications. Acceptability was measured on questionnaires. We estimated the association between high response rate and participant characteristics and conducted thematic analysis characterizing participant experiences. Study completion was 48/50 participants. Median prompt response rate was 66.5% (IQR: 60.0%-78.6%). Prior smartphone app use at baseline (aPR 3.76, 95%CI: 1.16–12.17, p = 0.03) and being in the intervention arm (aPR 2.55, 95% CI: 1.01–6.44, p = 0.05) were significantly associated with the top response rate quartile (response to >78.6% of prompts). All participants submitted self-initiated reports, covering all behaviors of interest, including potentially sensitive behaviors. Inconsistent phone charging was the most reported feasibility challenge. In this pilot, EMAI was acceptable and feasible. Response rates were good; additional strategies to improve compliance should be investigated. EMAI using mobile technologies may support improved behavioral data collection and intervention approaches in low and middle-income settings. This approach should be tested in larger studies.