Skip to main content

Exploring the digital footprint of depression: a PRISMA systematic literature review of the empirical evidence

A Correction to this article was published on 05 August 2022

This article has been updated



This PRISMA systematic literature review examined the use of digital data collection methods (including ecological momentary assessment [EMA], experience sampling method [ESM], digital biomarkers, passive sensing, mobile sensing, ambulatory assessment, and time-series analysis), emphasizing on digital phenotyping (DP) to study depression. DP is defined as the use of digital data to profile health information objectively.


Four distinct yet interrelated goals underpin this study: (a) to identify empirical research examining the use of DP to study depression; (b) to describe the different methods and technology employed; (c) to integrate the evidence regarding the efficacy of digital data in the examination, diagnosis, and monitoring of depression and (d) to clarify DP definitions and digital mental health records terminology.


Overall, 118 studies were assessed as eligible. Considering the terms employed, “EMA”, “ESM”, and “DP” were the most predominant. A variety of DP data sources were reported, including voice, language, keyboard typing kinematics, mobile phone calls and texts, geocoded activity, actigraphy sensor-related recordings (i.e., steps, sleep, circadian rhythm), and self-reported apps’ information. Reviewed studies employed subjectively and objectively recorded digital data in combination with interviews and psychometric scales.


Findings suggest links between a person’s digital records and depression. Future research recommendations include (a) deriving consensus regarding the DP definition and (b) expanding the literature to consider a person’s broader contextual and developmental circumstances in relation to their digital data/records.

Peer Review reports


The use of mobile devices, wearable technologies, and social media offers a wealth of health-related data to objectively assess symptoms of psychological disorders such as depression [96, 129]. In this context, research interest has emerged regarding the digital phenotyping (DP), or translation of a user’s tracing of digital data into health-related information [20, 84, 90, 95, 96, 99, 119]. However, considering the recent and rapid development of this field, conceptual clarification of specific terminology and a clear organization of depression-related evidence is needed [28]. Thus, the current research presents a systematic organization of available literature emphasizing (1) identification of empirical studies examining the use of digital data to study depression (with focus on the DP); (2) description of the different terms and digital data types employed; (3) integration of the evidence to ascertain the efficacy of digital data in the examination, diagnosis, and monitoring of depression; and (4) discussion of gaps within the field.

The digital phenotype

A phenotype encompasses the behavioral expression(s) of a person’s predispositions under the effects of their life experiences [42]. Thus, it is assumed that a person’s behavioral phenotype/profile carries critical information about their physical and mental health conditions [42]. For example, disruptive eating or sleeping patterns could raise the possibility of depressed mood [133]. In this context, practices similar to the examination of the phenomenology of real-life behavior (i.e., behavioral phenotype) have recently migrated into the field of online behavior and digital records [5]. Specifically, past research has evaluated the extent that digital data and cyber-behavior involving a range of aspects (e.g., frequency and intensity of Internet use; applications of preference; digital records accessed via wearable devices, etc.) may encapsulate diagnostic information relevant to one’s overall health [54, 84, 107, 116, 119, 140, 145, 164, 175, 179, 195]. Accordingly, the concept of DP has been frequently applied to non-differentially describe the digital footprint of individuals’ physical and mental health conditions, as this can be inferred from their cyber-behavior and other digitally collected data (such as wearable technology and mobile device usage; [119]).

Past research also used terms such as ‘ecological momentary assessment’, ‘experience sampling methods’, ‘passive sensing’, ‘ambulatory assessment’, ‘time-series analysis’, ‘mobile sensing’, ‘digital biomarkers’, and ‘biosensing’ (among others) to encapsulate the quantification of individual behavior via digital means, and thus have been effectively employed as DP synonyms [28, 49, 74, 86, 91, 189]. While all these terms have been used to describe the capturing of individual data in a highly ecological (‘in-situ’) and highly granular manner, differences can be observed regarding the level of subjectivity/objectivity, the data collection means, and the nature/type of the measurements collected they reflect.

Ecological momentary assessment [EMA], and experience sampling methods [ESM] focus on the highly ecological nature of measurements, encompassing subjective (e.g., self-report surveys), independent of the nature of the data acquired (e.g., one’s emotions vs daily activities), and may/may not involve the use of digital means (e.g., paper–pencil questionnaires) [11, 49, 113]. Similarly, ambulatory assessment employs computer-assisted technology to capture subjective/objective data collection [80, 86, 168, 182]. Moreover, passive sensing appears more specific due to emphasizing data acquisition in an objective/passive manner; however, it does not differentiate the digital technology used and/or the type of data collected (e.g., mobile phone or other portable devices [38]). The type of digital data collected appears to become clearer via concepts such as mobile sensing, where the use of one’s mobile phone is assumed to acquire data passively/objectively (e.g., patterns/frequency and length of one’s calls/texts [38]). Furthermore, terms such as digital biomarker and biosensing describe the objective/passive collection of broader biological data (e.g., a measurement variable associated with a disease outcome) via the use of digital tools [57]. Finally, time-series analysis [TSA] refers to the methodological approach employed to analyse data time-patterns with high granularity [89]. Thus, considering the significant differences (Table 1) and current undifferentiated use of terms referring to active and passive data collection, a more precise taxonomy within mental health contexts is imperative.

Table 1 Identification of specific conditions related to each type of methodology in the available literature

Digital phenotype potential

Despite the lack of conceptual clarity surrounding the DP definition, applying digital methodologies seems attractive and plausible [90, 119]. Specifically, increasing network connectivity embedded in electronic devices allows large quantities of data (i.e., big data) to be easily harvested [176]. When considering the significance of DP, ‘subjective/active data’ requires deliberate participant involvement in the collection process (e.g., questionnaire data), while ‘passive/objective’ digitalized data collection does not [177]. Thus, passive/objective sensing of data collected via digital technology has been proposed to increase the ecological validity of assessing psychopathological symptoms due to its (1) in situ and (2) ‘moment-to-moment’ characteristics [28].

Firstly, DP can be implemented ‘in situ or within naturalistic environments removed from artificial settings such as psychiatric interviews with the potential to outweigh traditional clinical practice methods in reliability and validity [17, 22, 41, 55, 63, 90, 145, 161]. Indeed, scholars highlight advantages, including higher reliability of employing objective data (e.g., duration of one’s calls derived from the digital records of their smartphone) for assessing disordered behaviors compared to self-report surveys [55]. Secondly, the continuous or ‘moment-to-moment’ flow of information generates higher data granularity regarding the assessment of symptoms of psychopathology by more frequently capturing and quantifying the individual’s behavior and its variations over time [115, 179]. Research has documented the variability and instability of cognitive and affective depressive symptoms over time, suggesting the need for a method that permits the continuous assessment of symptomatology [40, 41].

DP frameworks have been implemented in a variety of mental health contexts such as bipolar disorder [26, 29] and social anxiety [19, 92]. However, the current study will focus exclusively on the use of DP to assess depressive symptoms.

The digital footprint of depression

Depression is a pervasive disorder characterized by an overall negative affect that interferes with daily functioning [4]. Sufferers may exhibit several symptoms, including (but not limited to) reduced cognitive performance, insomnia, low mood/self-esteem, non-interactiveness/motor retardation, and reduced appetite [24, 185]. Previous research has employed digital technology to identify distinct associations between depressed participants and patterns of behavior [116, 118, 140, 169, 200]. For example, depression has been assessed via patterned psychomotor activity based on accelerometer oscillations and text/call behavior on mobile phones [93].

Depression was selected to be studied in relation to DP for its high lifetime prevalence in the general population (20.8% in the US; [101]), high comorbidity, differential diagnosis challenges [22], and its high variability within individuals [124]. For example, many individuals dealing with depressive episodes experience oscillations in suicidal ideation and thoughts of death, which may vary over their life course [4] and may be revealed by their online behavior and digital biomarkers [91]. Moreover, the nature of depressive symptoms has been reported to exert an adverse effect upon the active provision of accurate self-report and/or clinical interview-related information [19, 179]. Thus, passive/objective data collection based on DP procedures may provide a more accurate picture of the specific symptom profile of such individuals.

The present review

Previous research has implemented the DP and related terminology to investigate depressive symptoms, and systematic reviews of the current literature have been conducted [7, 11, 34, 44]. However, existing reviews have focused on specific technologies (e.g., mobile phones exclusively [44]) or on specific theoretical frameworks (e.g., EMA exclusively [34]). Thus, comprehensive, and to an extent comparative, work focusing on the different digital technologies/methods for the study of depression is needed.

The present systematic literature review employs the PRISMA framework to address the following aims: (1) identify the common trends of empirical studies involving the use of digital data to study depression; (2) describe the different technologies and data employed; (3) integrate the evidence for this disorder; and (4) describe/clarify the use of different terms in relation to the data collected.


Search strategy

The topic of this systematic literature review was registered on PROSPERO and received the registration number CRD42020186917 on 05/07/2020. Based on this, a computer (Boolean) search including [‘digital phenotype’ OR ‘digital phenotyping’ OR ‘passive sensing’ OR ‘digital biomarkers’ OR ‘ecological momentary assessment’ OR ‘experience sampling method’ OR ‘mobile sensing’ OR ‘ambulatory assessment’ OR ‘biosensing’ OR ‘smart sensing’ OR ‘activity recognition’ OR ‘crowdsensing’] AND [‘depression’ OR ‘depressive’ OR ‘depressed’] was conducted in Psycinfo, PubMed and Scopus databases on 01/06/2021.These databases were selected to cover a broad range of areas (such as artificial intelligence, linguistics and psychology). For example, Scopus and PubMed index the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE), Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI), and bioinformatic journals (e.g., JAMIA among many others).

Inclusion/Exclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria consisted of (a) empirical papers; (b) articles that included selected search terms in the title, abstract, and/or keywords; (c) papers that assessed depression severity (either at baseline to establish comparisons across depressed vs. non-depressed groups or as an outcome variable); and (d) articles that used digital technology in the assessment of one or more of variables. Considering the methodological heterogeneity of the included studies, no specifications were made in relation to time factor (i.e., longitudinal vs. cross-sectional; length of longitudinal assessment), study design (i.e., randomized control trial, etc.), and/or type of technology employed. Exclusion criteria consisted of: (a) articles that did not explicitly specify using digital means; (b) articles only using phone-call-based data collection (i.e., calling participants to complete surveys over the phone) due to limiting the ecological nature of data collection processes; and (c) papers evaluating psychometric properties of instruments measuring depression.

Selection of studies

Figure 1 depicts the PRISMA flowchart selection process to align with past relevant published reviews [3, 5, 180]. The search strategy produced 4998 relevant records overall (i.e., 3123 on Psycinfo, 1195 on PubMed, and 680 on Scopus). After removing duplicate records, an initial screening took place, excluding 4385 records that did not target selected search terms. Subsequently, two researchers (DZ and GdSC) systematically screened 563 relevant records excluding articles that did not address requirements (i.e., assessing depression and using digital technology). A third researcher (VS) resolved disagreements between researchers during the screening process. Next, a full-text assessment of these filtered articles revealed 445 records that failed to fulfill the outlined eligibility criteria. Studies excluded at this stage: (a) failed to address using digital technology to collect data; (b) conducted psychometric evaluations of questionnaires; (c) used only phone-call-based assessments; or (d) did not assess/presented results considering depression. Overall, 118 studies providing quantitative empirical evidence met the outlined criteria.

Fig. 1
figure 1

PRISMA flowchart of primary study selection. We excluded studies that exclusively called participants to conduct surveys over the phone given the limited ecological nature of such interventions. However, we have included studies that employed phone-based assessments where participants interact with pre-recorded messages. *Excluded if seacrh terms were not targeted in the article. **Excluded if study i) did not use digital technology to conduct momentary assessments, ii) conducted psychometric evaluations of questionnaires

Risk of bias assessment

To fulfill PRISMA framework guidelines, the Joanna Briggs Institute [98] checklist was adopted and modified to examine the risk of bias in cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses [123]. Assessed criteria included: (a) sample selection (i.e., randomization); (b) clearly stated participant eligibility criteria; (c) identification of potential confounding effects; (d) measurement bias; (e) adequate description of participant demographics; (f) follow-up time-length; (g) inclusion/explanation of participant attrition; (h) employment of appropriate and standardized measures to evaluate symptom severity; and (i) mitigation of bias in analysis by conducting multiple statistical analyses. A point was given for each criterion not addressed, with possible scores ranging from 0–9 in longitudinal studies (and 0–7 in cross-sectional studies), with higher scores representing higher risk of bias.


This section addresses the aims of the present study in the following order: (1) study characteristics (including design, demographic, and risk of bias); (2) technology used in the data collection, including the type of digital records employed (i.e., active/subjective and passive/objective); (3) depression-related empirical evidence acquired via the use of one’s digital traces; and (4) DP definitions and digital data mental health records terminology.

Study design, demographic characteristics, and risk of bias

Most reviewed studies employed a longitudinal design (range of 1 day to 2 years), and only four studies employed a cross-sectional design [51, 162, 170, 198]. There was an even distribution between clinical (46%) and community (54%) samples, with university students (24%) as the most frequent population, followed by adults with a diagnosis of major depressive disorder (MDD; 21%) and adults from the general population (9%). Most studies utilized an adult sample (18–73 age range), with five studies (4%) using an adolescent sample (13–18 age range) and two studies (2%) using a sample of children (6–14 age range). Most studies utilized a larger proportion of female participants (81% of studies) and participants of white/Caucasian ethnic background (42% of studies). Additionally, all studies employed samples derived from developed countries (USA 57%, Netherlands 12%, Germany 6%, Belgium 6%, Canada 5%, etc.), and one study employed a combined sample including participants from developing countries (Brazil/USA). See Table 2 below (and for a more detailed account of studies including main findings see Supplementary Table 1).

Table 2 Summary of studies including sample type, definition employed to describe DP, type of digital technology used, and dimension of depression assessed

Studies reviewed here represent a moderate risk of bias and acceptable quality. Observed scores ranged from 1 to 5 (higher scores represent a higher risk of bias) with a mean of 2.63 (SD = 0.90), 97.5% of studies < 5, and 84.7% < 4. The largest source of points given was due to not including follow-ups greater than one year (only four studies included follow-ups > one year) and the employment of a researcher-selected participant sample, with only 29 studies incorporating sample randomization (see Supplementary Table 2 for a detailed risk of bias assessment including an explanation of scoring system).

Digital data sources and participant involvement

Studies used a range of technologies to collect active/subjective, passive/objective, and mixed (i.e., active/subjective and passive/objective) data. Studies employing passively/objectively collected data often produced predictive models with high accuracy in the detection of depression severity involving significant predictors such as geospatial movement, sleep duration, delayed sleep phase, circadian rhythm, audio features, language, accelerometer oscillation, and light exposure during bedtime [12, 29, 49, 50, 52, 56]. Considering the type of technology, reviewed studies employed mobile technology (handheld IT devices such as smartphones, palmtops, tablets, laptops, etc.; [81]), wearable, mobile phone background features, and alternative technology (see Fig. 2).

Fig. 2
figure 2

This figure illustrates the type of digital data and technology used by studies included in this review.The left panel shows how many studies active data collection, passive data collection,and a combination of both. The right panel illustrates how many studies used each type of technology. For example 13 studies employed mobile phone embedded GPS, and 11 studies used mobile phone communication logs (such as SMS, call frequency, call duration and email usage)

Specifically, mobile technology involved smartphone applications and/or palmtops requesting participants to complete self-reported momentary assessments providing a range of information (e.g., mood, cognitive capacity, suicidal thoughts, sleep–wake cycle, stress, physical activity, depression severity, social interaction, etc.). Mobile technology-associated features involved surveying participants’ movement/activity levels via background tracking features embedded in smartphones (GPS, accelerometer/actigraphy, Wi-Fi location, screen activity, light exposure, keystroke metadata etc.). For example, Zulueta et al. [200] observed variations in daily typing speed and frequency of backspaces (denoting errors) to assess depression. Additionally, much like background tracking features embedded in smartphones, wearable technology includes technology that can be worn (e.g., heart patch) and enables moment-to-moment passive/objective data collection, allowing for increased data granularity resulting in increased diagnosis effectivity. For example, Cho et al. [29] observed decreased regularity of sleep–wake cycle (as measured by heart rate) in participants with depressed mood, resulting in 71% accuracy in the prediction of depressive episodes (the model included other predictive variables such as light exposure).

Finally, other reviewed studies used alternative means of digital data collection, including online surveys, interactive voice recordings, and speech and facial features recognition. Much like momentary assessments completed via smartphones or handheld devices, online surveys were triggered by SMS text messages at semi-random intervals requiring participants to complete questions about their sleep habits, mood, stress, etc. Similarly, studies employing interactive voice recordings collected momentary assessments during phone calls in which participants responded to pre-recorded automated surveys. Considering speech and facial features recognition, studies evaluated: acoustic/prosodic speech features (i.e., pitch, intonation, loudness, and pause length), speech content (i.e., linguistic dimensions identified via linguistic inquiry word count, LIWC), and facial features (including facial expressivity, movement, and pupil dilation). These features were extracted from audio and video recordings to predict depression severity with acceptable accuracy. For example, Schultebraucks et al. [162] observed a predictive accuracy of AUC = 0.86, with linguistic features, voice prosody, facial features of emotion, and movement features (such as pupil dilation) as the most important predictors.

Depressive behaviour digital traces

Regarding digital records related to one’s depressive behaviors, reviewed studies targeted different aspects of depression focusing on affective, somatic, and cognitive changes in participants. Studies employed standardized measuresFootnote 1 to establish baseline depression severity and subsequently evaluate the degree of relationship. The most investigated aspect of depression was moodFootnote 2 (72 studies), followed by psychomotor activityFootnote 3 (33 studies), social functioningFootnote 4 (21 studies), cognitive styleFootnote 5 (19 studies), sleep qualityFootnote 6 (16 studies), cognitive performanceFootnote 7 (6 studies), food intake [69, 114, 168], and suicidality [74]. In addition, 27 studiesFootnote 8 evaluated the associations between depressive symptoms and variables of interest (for example social media use) or interventions to reduce depression severity (for example providing regular feedback vs no feedback).

Overall, most studies (including both clinical and non-clinical samples) reported associations between increased depression severity and higher negative affect, lower levels of physical activity, decreased social functioning, increased variability in sleep quality, decreased cognitive performance, and depressive cognitive styles (e.g., trait rumination, reassurance-seeking, etc.). Table 3 summarizes findings acquired via the range of technologies applied (for a more detailed account of findings, see Supplementary Table 1).

Table 3 Summary of depression-related empirical evidence

Definitions and terminology used to describe the digital phenotype

There was a general agreement among reviewed studies that methodologies involving fine-grained observations in naturalistic settings can increase effectiveness and accuracy in evaluating psychopathology. However, alternative terms such as ecological momentary assessment (EMA, n = 48), experience sampling method (ESM, n = 44), digital phenotype/ing (DP, n = 14), ambulatory assessment (AA, n = 8), passive sensing (n = 5), mobile sensing (n = 3), digital biomarkers (n = 3), and time-series analysis (n = 2) have been utilized in the studies reviewed. These terms were used in an undifferentiated manner to reflect methodologies involving high granularity and naturalistic observations (no studies employed the term biosensing, smart sensing, activity recognition, or crowdsensing). In addition, 59% of studies (n = 70) omit including a formal definition of the methodology used, while simply highlighting the benefits involved in the use of momentary assessments. Figure 3 shows the frequency distribution of definitions employed by studies discriminated by year and type of technology. Interestingly, terms referring exclusively to digital technology (i.e., DP and Digital biomarkers) have increased in the last five years (2016 – 2021). Additionally, most reviewed studies using technology needing active/subjective data collection (i.e., mobile apps and handheld computers) align with ESM and EMA definitions.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Number of studies using each definition discriminated by year (in the left panel) and by type of technology (in the right panel). Studies using the word 'digital' in their employed methodology (i.e., digital biomarkers) were published since 2018. Additionally, the majority of studies using ESM and EMA as selected methodology employed digital technology that relies on active data (i.e.,mobile apps and handheld computers)

Reviewed studies define DP as the ability to measure phenotypical/ behavioral expressions through any digital means without consistently assuming the collection of passive/objective data [29, 128, 135, 152, 200]. This perspective includes any methods of quantifying an individual’s online and offline behavior via personal digital devices, in-situ, and in real-time [178]. Reviewed studies also utilized the terms EMA and ESM to conceptualize fine-grained assessments of depression severity when digital technology was used. However, considering that EMA and ESM were initially coined in the pre-digital era, confusion with studies non explicitly using digital technology occurred [112, 117].

Studies employing terms such as mobile sensing and passive sensing highlighted similar features elaborating on the ability to passively detect behaviors that might be related to specific mental disorders. Nonetheless, mobile sensing assumes the exclusive use of smartphone-derived data [154, 189], while passive sensing tends to involve the use of other mobile/portable and alternative types of technology (such as chest patch or digital rings) to conduct momentary assessments [168]. Interestingly, ambulatory assessment was used undifferentiated to capture passive and active data collection (i.e., self-reports) via computer-assisted technology [52, 80]. Reviewed studies employing the term biomarker, or digital biomarker did not provide clear definitions or explanations regarding what distinguishes this methodological approach. Nonetheless, a biomarker is a measurement variable associated with a disease outcome, usually derived from internal body function rates (e. g. blood pressure; cholesterol levels). Digital biomarkers are considered digital due to utilizing sensors and computational tools (e.g., wearable technology, smartphone sensors) to conduct passive/objective data collection [149]. Finally, time-series analysis has been identified as the analytic approach to evaluating data time patterns with high granularity [89].

Interestingly, most studies did not elaborate on the utilization of active/passive data collection methods, and only a handful of studies saw the need to provide clarification. Narziev et al. [138] make an explicit distinction between EMA and passive sensing, indicating that EMA refers to active/subjective participant involvement (i.e., tasks or questionnaires) and passive sensing refers to passive/objective participant involvement (i.e., actigraph, GPS or heart rate monitoring). Similarly, Di Matteo et al. [49] explicitly differentiate EMA from passive EMA, implying the need to differentiate these two concepts. This suggests that the employment of digitalized active data collection (such as digital EMA and ESM) currently encompasses a broad designation of methods, that may lack descriptive value and utility, while likely adding a convoluted interpretation/implementation to the field.


The use of digital records for assessing and treating depressive behaviors, has been receiving increased attention [17, 20, 90, 146]. Specifically, researchers highlighted the potentially increased ecological validity of moment-to-moment and in-situ assessments of disorder-related symptoms using digital technology [28, 177]. Considering the relatively recent emergence of this field, the current work aimed to employ a PRISMA framework to provide a comprehensive review of available literature using digital means/records to study depression with focus on the DP. In addition, it aimed to summarize the methods and types of data used in the assessment/monitoring of depressive symptoms and to identify areas of potential future research priority. Finally, it focused on identifying and differentiating the terms mostly utilized to describe how a person’s digital records could contribute to understanding their depressive mood. Findings illustrate that: (a) there is a promising potential in the use of one’s digital traces (i.e., digitally monitored/recorded data); (b) current research trends appear skewed towards specific age groups and national populations, likely restricting generalizability; and (c) inconsistencies occur regarding the meanings attached to the terminologies used (e.g., DP).

Overview and research trends

In total, 118 eligible studies of a moderate/good quality were reviewed, revealing that research concerning the digital footprint of depression tends to be recent and skewed towards adult samples and developed countries. Additionally, there was a significant focus on assessing mood/affect compared to other clusters of symptoms related to depression (e.g., psychomotor activity, sleep quality, social functioning, etc.; Table 3). Finally, the field appears to be expanding rapidly, given that most studies included in this review were published within the most recent four years, with a progressively increasing trend per calendar year over time (no time restriction was applied in our inclusion criteria; Fig. 3). Considering these observations, future research may wish to address the current gaps in the field by assessing symptoms of depression associated with different aspects/dimensions of the disorder (e.g., psychomotor activity), using non-adult samples, and (more importantly) investigating populations from non-developed countries.

Digital data sources and participant involvement

The reviewed studies used a wide variety of methods employing digital means to obtain phenotypical expressions of individuals’ depressive symptoms, including self-report apps, smartphone keystroke metadata, mobile phone calls and texts, online surveys, actigraphy sensor-related recordings (i.e., steps, sleep, circadian rhythm, GPS), and even digital records of voice. A common rationale to collect data via digital technology involved reflecting on the ubiquitous presence of mobile phones facilitating self-report momentary assessments and highlighting the potential to obtain otherwise elusive information on one’s social engagement behavior [19, 177]. Indeed, mobile phones in combination with wearable technology represented most instances of digital data collection methods reviewed here. This highlights the potential benefits of mobile phones and/or wearable technology sourced data within psychiatry and psychology [60, 63, 145, 164, 169, 177, 179].

Previous studies have also illustrated the potential value of social media content for understanding mental health [36, 43, 68, 112, 137]. Nonetheless, such information was not explored in depth in the studies reviewed here, indicating the need for further research. Similarly, while smartphone keystroke metadata and wearable technology (e.g., heart patch, wristwatch, etc.) show promising results, the evidence indicates that it has been employed scarcely. At this point, it should be noted that this PRISMA literature review did not include specific search terms such as ‘actigraph’ or ‘GPS’, and thus studies employing such methodology without mentioning the use of DP may not have been included.

Depressive behaviours digital traces

Considering the empirical evidence of assessment of depression via digital technology, dimensions of depressive symptoms (i.e., mood, psychomotor activity, social functioning, sleep, and cognitive performance) were captured using a variety of digital technologies. These included smartphone-facilitated momentary assessments, mood logs, actigraphy data such as daily steps, GPS-derived activity, sleep, heart rate, light sensors recordings, SMS length and count, phone call data, keystroke meta-data, one’s geocoded activity, and speech technology.

Interestingly, studies made emphasis on positive associations between the variability of one’s sleep, affect and other psycho-motor aspects of depression and self-reported symptom severity [13, 49, 52, 56]. Thus, variability in depressive signs, such as depressive affect, lack of concentration, lack of motivation/pleasure for social engagement, or suicidal ideation/intention, appear to be accurately captured via digital technology. This highlights the advantageous nature of the DP when assessing within-individuals variability of depressive symptoms (e.g., over time patterns of depressive behaviors within the same person). Additionally, evidence was provided to support the viability of the DP in predicting depression and monitoring the effectiveness of targeted interventions [29, 90, 136, 187, 200]. For example, studies employed GPS-derived data to infer participant movement and thus predict depression severity with high accuracy [126]. These suggest that the DP can effectively be used to identify, monitor, and predict both between-individuals (i.e., how different individuals may experience the same symptoms), but more importantly within-individual (i.e., how different depressive manifestations may present with varying trajectories regarding the same individual) variations of depressive symptoms.

Although these observations support the rationale for employing DP in identifying depression symptom severity, lack of support was also observed. Contrary to hypothesized relationships, some reviewed studies observed no relationships between depression severity and variability in positive affect [72, 79, 151], reduced sleep quality [52, 76, 128], reduced psychomotor activity [30, 128], reduced social functioning [136], and cognitive performance [88]. This supports that while promising results are evident, further calibration/assessment in employed digital technology is required.

Conceptual challenges

Most studies reviewed here utilized the terms ‘ecological momentary assessment [EMA]’, ‘experience sampling method [ESM]’ and ‘digital phenotype/ing [DP]’ to describe any form of in situ, passive, digital data/record collection. Similarly, a minority of the reviewed studies used ‘ambulatory assessment’, ‘digital biomarkers’, ‘passive sensing’, ‘mobile sensing’, and ‘time-series analysis’. However, studies reviewed employed such terms interchangeably, highlighting the occurrence of conceptual heterogeneity in their application regarding three dimensions: (a) the use of digital/non-digital technology; (b) the use of active and/or passive data; and (c) the domain/means/types of collected data employed (e.g., online/offline behaviors; mobile phone usage/ other wearable/portable devices usage data).

The reviewed evidence indicates that EMA/ESM and ambulatory assessment may additionally communicate active/subjective involvement of participants through self-reported assessments and might not necessarily involve the use of digital technology (e.g., pen and paper surveys). Similarly, studies using terms such as ‘passive/mobile sensing’ referring to passive/objective data collection do not distinguish the behavior/data monitored (e.g., biological measures and online usage measures). Thus, addressing/clarifying the conceptual challenges observed in the field is compelling to: (a) improve the understanding of such methodologies; (b) increase future capacity to synthesize/integrate and compare empirical evidence; and (c) minimize the hindering of future research due to conceptual confusion. To contribute to this need, the findings of the present review suggest the concurrent consideration of aspects related to the level of granularity, objectivity/subjectivity, means, and nature of digital data collection implemented, to provide guidelines for the terms/definitions used (see Fig. 4).

Fig. 4
figure 4

This Conceptual flowchart clarifies the current taxonomy within the field and provides guidelines suggesting how to used each related term. for example, while all these terms refer to methodologies with high granularity, some may employ digital technology, and some may not

All terms employed in the studies reviewed (e.g., ESM, EMA, DP, passive sensing, bio-sensing, etc.) appear to share the advantage of conducting in situ assessments in a moment-to-moment manner providing higher ecological validity [14, 20, 22, 60, 63, 145, 164, 179]. However, EMA, ESM and ambulatory assessment [AA] do not necessarily employ digital means (e.g., they may also use pen-and-paper), and even when they do so, they tend to exclusively involve active/subjective data collection (e.g., self-report questionnaires). Moreover, based on studies reviewed here, the DP necessarily assumes the use of digital means and the collection of objective/passive data without differentiating the type of technology (e.g., mobile phone/ wearable technology) or the nature of data used (e.g., biological measurements, behaviors, etc.). This aligns with the broadly understood definition of phenotype as the expression of one’s behavior or reactions objectively monitored/observed and not self-reported [42, 96]. Therefore, the inclusion of self-report measures under the umbrella of phenotyping is a contradiction and may be denominated as active DP, when digital means are used.

In this context, the reviewed findings suggest that DP may well conceptually operate as an umbrella term, inclusive of various methodologies, which differ on the specific means and nature of data collected (despite sharing high granularity and assuming digitally collected passive/objective data). In that context, passive physiological sensing may need to be introduced as a distinct form of DP emphasizing sensing/recording/monitoring one’s (externally observed) physiological activity/behavior (e.g., sleep, daily steps and distance moved). In contrast, digital biomarkers, as a complementary subtype of passive physiological sensing, may be considered to exclusively monitor internal biological measures (e.g., blood pressure; heartbeat). Similarly based on the content captured, mobile sensing could be viewed as exclusively monitoring mobile phone-derived information (e.g., SMS text, calls, GPS, actigraphy, etc.) and not any type of data collected via one’s phone. Finally, the term ‘cyber-phenotyping’ is supported to be introduced as an emerging subordinate DP theme to describe the in situ and continuous measurement/analysis of mental health digital footprints inferred exclusively from one’s cyber-behavior/ online usage (e.g., social media and online gaming). It is argued that although all these forms constitute passive sensing procedures, it is useful to be distinguished based on the distinct types of content they record, irrespective of the device used. Future technological progress is envisaged to generate new means of data collection that should not generate a similar inflation of terms regarding their usage in the mental health area. The proposed conceptual clarifications are expected to result in higher specificity in the use of the different terms and provide a ground for further elaboration in the field.

Conclusion, limitations, and future directions

The present systematic literature review has significant theoretical and practical implications regarding the use of a person’s digital records to contribute to the assessment of depressive behaviors. Firstly, the integration of available empirical evidence highlights the viability and effectiveness of employing digital technology for the assessment/evaluation of depressive symptoms. Secondly, the current research trends observed in this review highlight important gaps inviting future research. Specifically, the assessment of dimensions of depression such as psychomotor activity or quality of sleep, the use of lifelong representative samples, and the validation of current knowledge in non-developed countries seem warranted. The potentially different response patterns across different population groups (e.g., individualistic vs. collectivistic cultures) may differentially relate to depressive presentations across populations compromising the comparability of findings (i.e., lack of measurement invariance [70]). Thirdly, high innovation and variability in relation to the data collection methods employed was observed. It is hoped that further opportunities will emerge with increased innovation and promotion of digitalization across different areas of every-day life.

Finally, it is suggested that refinement be made in reference to the terminology used to improve accuracy and specificity within this emerging research field. Indeed, a homogenous conceptual implementation of what is DP, and how it differs from other concepts/terms, may translate into higher unity/consistency in the field, alongside more commonly used terms that may be easier communicated to non-academic audiences. To this end, it is suggested that the term DP should be conceptualized as a superordinate term that is assumed to involve all instances where digital technology and objective passive data are used to examine a person’s health/mental health condition. Similarly, it is suggested that the term ‘active DP’ should be adopted to encompass all methodologies employing digital technology and the use of active/subjective data collection.

Despite these important findings, the present review also includes several limitations. Firstly, only studies published in English have been reviewed; thus, developments recorded in different languages may not have been captured. Secondly, only digital data-based studies related to depressive behaviors have been examined, and thus conclusions in relation to other presentations have not been addressed. Thirdly, while the use of digital technology may enable passive sensing of individual data to potentially increase the objectivity and ecological validity of depression-related symptoms, the possibility of confirmation bias exists [10]. For example, researchers attempting to minimize bias associated with traditional forms of assessments (such as interviews) may inadvertently favor methods enabling passive data collection. Fourthly, many of the studies included in the current review used the same or overlapping samples (e.g., [28, 130131] used the NESDA study); thus, caution should be exercised when interpreting findings presented herein. Additionally, the inclusion criteria utilized in the current search only required articles utilizing digital technology to assess depressive behaviors without necessarily identifying specific types of technology (e.g., GPS, actigraphy, mobile phone usage, etc.). Similarly, considering that the field of digital phenotyping is currently being published in a broad range of different journals with specific focus (e.g., informatics, medicine, medical informatics, computer science, engineering, etc.), many relevant journals may not have been covered by the databases included in the current review. Therefore, future research may benefit from a more refined search strategy to identify the use of DP related to selected types of technology, as well as targeting journals likely covering a broader collection of disciplines.

Nonetheless, in the context of these limitations, the present review constitutes a significant record considering the rapid advancement of the field, as well as the prospective opportunities and risks related to this highly promising intersection of mental health assessment with digital technology.

Availability of data and materials

Studies included in the current review are publicly available, free to access (hyperlink in ‘references’ section) and included in the submission of the current manuscript.

Change history


  1. Standardizes measures include [9, 32, 39, 48, 61, 62, 64, 75, 78, 108, 111, 120, 127, 132, 156,159, 165, 199].

  2. Studies assessing mood include [1, 2, 6, 8, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24, 27, 29, 30, 31, 33, 35, 37, 40, 45, 46, 50, 51, 66, 67, 71, 72. 73, 77, 79, 80, 82, 86, 87, 88, 89, 94, 100, 102, 103, 104, 105, 109, 114, 121, 122, 125, 130, 131, 135, 136, 138, 139, 141, 142, 144, 147, 148, 150, 151, 172, 173, 174, 181, 183, 186, 188, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194].

  3. Studies assessing psychomotor activity include [6, 13, 15, 16, 29, 30, 37, 40, 49, 52, 79, 91, 92, 93, 94, 103, 104, 105, 125, 126, 128, 130, 131, 135, 135, 142, 152, 154, 162, 168, 170, 186, 187, 198, 200].

  4. Studies assessing social functioning include [8, 13, 24, 27, 30, 31, 49, 66, 79, 80, 93, 94, 126, 136, 138, 152, 154, 163, 168, 188, 194].

  5. Studies assessing cognitive style include [1, 2, 6, 33, 45, 58,82, 86, 87, 102, 106, 148, 150, 155, 173, 184, 191, 194, 197].

  6. Studies assessing sleep quality include [6, 13, 21, 29, 49, 52, 56, 76, 88, 100, 105, 128, 131, 135, 138, 144].

  7. Studies assessing cognitive performance include [24, 37, 88, 170, 187, 200].

  8. Studies assessing relationships between depression and variables of interest included [8, 15, 16, 23, 25, 47, 53, 59, 65, 71, 76, 77, 83, 85, 97, 110, 122, 134, 143, 153, 157, 158, 160, 167, 171, 189, 196].


  1. Abela JRZ, Morrison E, Starrs C. Excessive reassurance seeking, self-esteem, and depressive symptoms in children of affectively ill parents: an experience sampling analysis. J Soc Clin Psychol. 2007;26(7):849–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Adams P, Abela JRZ, Auerbachm R, Skitch S. Self-criticism, dependency, and stress reactivity: an experience sampling approach to testing Blatt and Zuroff’s (1992) theory of personality predispositions to depression in high-risk youth. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2009;35(11):1440–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Alexandraki K, Stavropoulos V, Anderson E, Latifi MQ, Gomez R. Adolescent pornography use: a systematic literature review of research trends 2000–2017. Curr Psychiatr Rev. 2018;14(1):1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Author.

  5. Anderson E.L., Steen E, Stavropoulos V. Internet use and problematic internet use: a systematic review of longitudinal research trends in adolescence and emergent adulthood. 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bai, R., Xiao, L., Guo, Y., Zhu, X., Li, N., Wang, Y., Chen, Q., Feng, L., Wang, Y., Yu, X., Xie, H., Wang, H. (2021). Tracking and monitoring mood stability of patients with major depressive disorder by machine learning models using passive digital data: prospective naturalistic multicenter study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth, 9(3).

  7. Balaskas, A., Schueller, S. M., Cox, A. L., & Doherty, G. (2021). Ecological momentary interventions for mental health: a scoping review. PLoS ONE 16(3).

  8. Bartels SL, van Knippenberg RJM, Köhler S, Ponds RW, Myin-Germeys I, Verhey FRJ, de Vugt ME. The necessity for sustainable intervention effects: lessons-learned from an experience sampling intervention for spousal carers of people with dementia. Aging Ment Health. 2020;24(12):2082–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Beck AT, Steer RA, Ball R, Ranieri W. Comparison of Beck depression inventories – IA and -II in psychiatric outpatients. J Pers Assess. 1996;67(3):588–97.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Belgavi MC, Muniyal B. Performance Evaluation of Supervised Machine Learning Algorithms for Intrusion Detection. Paper presented at the Twelfth International Multi-Conference on Information Processing-2016 (IMCIP-2016). 2016. p. 117–23.

  11. Bell, I., Lim, M. H., Rossell, S. L., & Thomas, N. (2017). Ecological momentary assessment and intervention in the treatment of psychotic disorders: a systematic review. Psychiatr Serv 68(11).

  12. Ben-Zeev D, Young MA, Madsen JW. Retrospective recall of affect in clinically depressed individuals and controls. Cogn Emot. 2009;23(5):1021–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ben-Zeev D, Scherer EA, Wang R, Xie H, Campbell AT. Next-generation psychiatric assessment: using smartphone sensors to monitor behavior and mental health. Psychiatr Rehabil J. 2015;38(3):218–26.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Bernardos, A. M., Pires, M., Olle, D., Casar, J. R. (2019). Digital phenotyping as a tool for personalized mental healthcare. PervasiveHealth’19: Proceedings of the EAI International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare, 403–409.

  15. Beute F, de Kort AW. The natural context of wellbeing: ecological momentary assessment of the influence of nature and daylight on affect and stress for individuals with depression levels varying from none to clinical. Health Place. 2018;49:7–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bickham DS, Hswen Y, Rich M. Media use and depression: exposure, household rules, and symptoms among young adolescents in the United States. Int J Public Health. 2015;60(2):147–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Bidargaddi, N., Musiat, P., Makinen, V-P., Ermes, M., Schrader, G., & Licinio, J. (2017). Digital footprints: facilitating large-scale environmental psychiatric research in naturalistic settings through data from everyday technologies. Mol Psychiat 22(2):164–169.

  18. Bos EH, de Jonge P, Cox RFA. Affective variability in depression: revisiting the inertia-instability paradox. Br J Psychol. 2019;110:814–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Boukhechba M, Chow P, Fua K, Teachman BA, Barnes LE. Predicting social anxiety from global positioning system traces of college students: feasibility study. JMIR Mental Health. 2018;5(3):1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Bourla A, Ferreri F, Ogorzelec L, Guinchard C, Mouchabac S. Assessment of mood disorders by passive data gathering: The concept of digital phenotype versus psychiatrist’s professional culture. L’encephale. 2017;44(2):168–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bower B, Bylsma LM, Morris BH, Rottenberg J. Poor reported sleep quality predicts low positive affect in daily life among healthy and mood-disordered persons. J Sleep Res. 2010;19(2):323–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Brietzke E, Hawken ER, Idzikowski M, Pong J, Kennedy SH, Soares C. Integrating digital phenotyping in clinical characterisation of individuals with mood disorders. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2019;104:223–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Brose A, Wichers M, Kuppens P. Daily stressful experiences precede but do not succeed depressive symptoms: results from a longitudinal experience sampling study. J Soc Clin Psychol. 2017;36(3):196–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Brown LH, Strauman T, Barrantes-Vidal N, Silvia PJ, Kwapil TR. An Experience-Sampling Study of Depressive Symptoms and Their Social Context. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2011;199(6):403–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Burns, M. N., Begale, M., Duffecy, J., Gergle, D., Karr, C. J., Giangrande, E., & Mohr, D. C. (2011). Harnessing context sensing to develop a mobile intervention for depression. J Med Internet Res 13(3).

  26. Busk J, Faurhold-Jepsen M, Frost M, Bardram JE, Vedel Kessing L, Winther O. Forecasting mood in bipolar disorder from smartphone self-assessments: hierarchical Bayesian approach. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2020;8(4):1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Bylsma LM, Taylor-Clift A, Rottenberg J. Emotional Reactivity to Daily Events in Major and Minor Depression. J Abnorm Psychol. 2011;120(1):155–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Campbell, A. T., Gomez, J., Kim, S., Valkó, A. G., Wan, C., & Turányi, Z. R. (2000). Design, implementation, and evaluation of cellular IP. IEEE Personal communications, 7(4), 42–49.

  29. Cho C, Lee T, Kim M, In HP, Kim L, Lee H. Mood Prediction of Patients with Mood Disorders by Machine Learning Using Passive Digital Phenotypes Based on the Circadian Rhythm: Prospective Observational Study. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21(4): e11029.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Chow, P., I., Fua. K., Huang, U., Bonelli, W., Xiong, H., Barnes, L. E., & Teachman, B. A. (2017). Using Mobile Sensing to Test Clinical Models of Depression, Social Anxiety, State Affect, and Social Isolation Among College Students. JMIR, 19(3).

  31. Chue A, E., Gunthert, K. C., Ahrens, A. H., & Skalina, L. M. How Does Social Anger Expression Predict Later Depression Symptoms? It Depend on How Often One is Angry. Emotion. 2016;17(1):6–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Clark LA, Watson D. Tripartite model of anxiety and depression: Psychometric evidence and taxonomic implications. J Abnorm Psychol. 1991;100:316–36.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Clasen, P. C., Fisher, A. J., & Beevers, C. G. (2015). Mood-Reactive Self-Esteem and Depression Vulnerability: Person-Specific Symptom Dynamics via Smart Phone Assessment. PLoS ONE, 10(7).

  34. Colombo D, Fernandez-Alvarez J, Patane A, Semonella M, Kwiatkowska M, Garcia-Palacios A, Cipresso P, Riva G, Botella C. Current State and Future Directions of Technology-Based Ecological Momentary Assessment and Intervention for Major Depressive Disorder: A Systematic Review. J Clin Med. 2019;8:465.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Colombo D, Suso-Ribera C, Fernandez-Alvare J, Cipresso P, Garcia-Palacios A, Riva G, Botella C. Affect Recall Bias: Being Resilient by Distorting Reality. Cogn Ther Res. 2020;44:906–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Coppersmith, G., Dredze, M., Harman, C., Hollingshead, K. (2015). From ADHD to SAD: Analyzing the Language of Mental Health on Twitter through Self-Reported Diagnoses. Proceedings from the 2nd Workshop on Computational Linguistics and Clinical Psychology: From Linguistic Signal to Clinical Reality, 1–10. Association for Computational Linguistics.

  37. Cormack F, McCue M, Taptiklis N, Skirrow C, Glazer E, Panagopoulos E, van Schaik TA, Fehnert B, King J, Barnett JH. Wearable Technology for High-Frequency Cognitive and Mood Assessment in Major Depressive Disorder: Longitudinal Observational Study. JMIR Mental Health. 2019;6(11): e12814.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Cornet VP, Holden RJ. Systematic review of smartphone-based passive sensing for health and wellbeing. J Biomed Inform. 2017;77:120–32.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Cox J, Holden J, Sagovsky R. Detection of Postnatal Depression: Development of the 10-item Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale. Br J Psychiatry. 1987;150:782–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Cushing CC, Bejarano CM, Mitchell TB, Noser AE, Crick CJ. Individual Differences in Negative Affectivity and Physical Activity in Adolescents: An Ecological Momentary Assessment Study. J Child Fam Stud. 2018;27:2772–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Cuthbert, B. N., & Insel, T. R. (2013). Toward the future of psychiatric diagnosis: the seven pillars of RDoC. BMC Medicine, 11(126), 1–8.

  42. Dawkins, R. (1982). The Extended Phenotype: The Gene as the Unit Selection. Oxford University Press.

  43. De Choudhury, M., Gamon, M., Counts, S., & Horvitz, E. (2013). Predicting Depression via Social Media. Proceedings from the seventh International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media. Association for the advancement of Artificial Intelligence.

  44. De Vries LP, Baselmans BM, Bartels M. Smartphone-Based Ecological Momentary Assessment of Well-Being: A Systematic Review and Recommendations for Future Studies. J Happiness Stud. 2020.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Dejonckheere E, Kalokerinos EK, Bastian B, Kuppens P. Poor emotion regulation ability mediates the link between depressive symptoms and affective bipolarity. Cogn Emot. 2019;33(5):1076–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Demiralp E, Thompson RJ, Mata J, Jaeggi SM, Buschkuehl M, Feldman Barrett L, Ellsworth PC, Demiralp M, Hernadez-Garcia L, Deldin PJ, Gotlib IH, Jonides J. Feeling Blue or Turquoise? Emotional Differentiation in Major Depressive Disorder. Psychol Sci. 2012;23(11):1410–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Depp CA, Ceglowski J, Wang VC, Yaghouti F, Mausbach BT, Thompson WK, Granholm EL. Augmenting psychoeducation with a mobile intervention for bipolar disorder: a randomized control trial. J Affect Disord. 2015;15(174):23–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Derogatis, L. R. (1977). SCL-90-R: Administration, scoring and procedures manual-II for the R(evised) version. Clinical Psychometric Research.

  49. Di Matteo D, Fotinos K, Lokuge S, Yu J, Sternat T, Katzman MA, Rose J. The Relationship Between Smartphone-Recorded Environmental Audio and Symptomatology of Anxiety and Depression: Exploratory Study. JMIR Formative Res. 2020;4(8). 10.2196/18751

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Di Matteo D, Wang W, Fotinos K, Lokuge S, Yu J, Sternat T, Katzman MA, Rose J. Smartphone-Detected Ambient Speech and Self-Reported Measures of Anxiety and Depression: Exploratory Observational Study. JMIR Formative Res. 2021;5(1):1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Dietvorst E, Hiemstra M, Maciejewski D, van Roekel E, ter Bogt T, Hillegers M, Keijsers L. Grumpy or depressed? Disentangling typically developing adolescent mood from prodromal depression using experience sampling methods. J Adolesc. 2021;88:25–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Difrancesco S, Lamers F, Riese H, Merikangas KR, Beekman ATF, van Hemert A, Schoevers RA, Penninx B, W., J., H. Sleep, circadian rhythm, and physical activity patterns in depressive and anxiety disorders: A 2-week ambulatory assessment study. Depress Anxiety. 2018;36:975–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Eddington KM, Burgin CJ, Silvia PJ, Fallah N, Majestic C, Kwapil TR. The Effects of Psychotherapy for Major Depressive Disorder on Daily Mood and Functioning: A Longitudinal Experience Sampling Study. Cogn Ther Res. 2017;41:266–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Elenko, E., Underwood, L., & Zohar, D. (2015). Defining digital medicine. Nature biotechnology, 33(5), 456–461.

  55. Ellis, D. A. (2019). Are smartphones really that bad? Improving the psychological measurement of technology-related behaviors. Computers in Human Behavior, 97, 60–66.

  56. Elovainio M, Kuula L, Halonen R, Pesonen A. Dynamic fluctuations of emotional states in adolescents with delayed sleep phase—A longitudinal network modeling approach. J Affect Disord. 2020;276:467–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Enaw, J. O. E, & Smith, A. K. (2013). Biomarker Development for Brain-Based Disorders: Recent Progress in Psychiatry. J Neurol Psychol, 1(2), 1–16.

  58. Fang L, Marchetti I, Hoorelbeke K, Koster EHW. Do daily dynamics in rumination and affect predict depressive symptoms and trait rumination? An experience sampling study. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2019;63:66–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Feiler S, Muller KG, Muller A, Dalhaus R, Eich W. Using Interaction Graphs for Analysing the Therapy Process. Psychother Psychosom. 2005;74:93–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Ferreri F, Bourla A, Mouchabac S, Karila L. E-Addictology: An Overview of New Technologies for Assessing and Intervening in Addictive Behaviors. Front Psych. 2018;9(51):1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. First MB, Spitzer RL, Gibbon M, Williams JB. Structured clinical interview for DSM-IV-TR axis I disorders-patient edition. New York: New York State Psychiatric Institute; 2002.

  62. Forkmann T, Boecker M, Wirtz M, Eberle N, Westhofen M, Schauerte P, Mischke K, Kircher T, Gauggel S, Norra C. Development and validation of the Rasch-based Depression Screening (DESC) using Rasch Analysis and structural equation modelling. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry. 2009;40:468–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Frangou, S. (2018). Commentary on: Objective smartphone data as a potential diagnostic marker of bipolar disorder. Australian & New Zealand J Psychiatr, 53(2).

  64. Fukui I. The depression and anxiety mood scale (DAMS): scale development and validation. Japanese Journal of Behavioral Therapy. 1997;23:83–93.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Gansner M, Nisenson M, Carson N, Torous J. A pilot study using ecological momentary assessment via smartphone application to identify adolescent problematic internet use. Psychiatry Res. 2020.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Geyer EC, Fua KC, Daniel KE, Chow PI, Bonelli W, Huang Y, Barnes LE, Teachman BA. I Did OK, but Did I Like It? Using Ecological Momentary Assessment to Examine Perceptions of Social Interactions Associated with Severity of Social Anxiety and Depression. Behav Ther. 2018;49:866–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Giesbrecht GF, Letourneau N, Campbell T, Kaplan BJ. Affective experience in ecologically relevant contexts is dynamic and not progressively attenuated during pregnancy. Archives of Women’s Mental Health. 2012;15:481–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Gkotsis, G., Oellrich, A., Velupillai, S., Liakata, M., Hubbard, T. J. P., Dobson, R. J. B, & Dutta, R. (2017). Characterisation of mental health conditions in social media using Informed Deep Learning. Scientific Reports, 7(45141).

  69. Goldschmidt AB, Crosby RD, Engel SG, Crow SJ, Cao L, Peterson CB, Durkin N. Affect and Eating Behavior in Obese Adults with and without Elevated Depression Symptoms. Int J Eat Disord. 2014;47(3):281–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Gomez R, Stavropoulos V, Watson S. Measurement Invariance Across Adult Self-Ratings of Current and Retrospective Childhood ADHD Symptoms. J Psychopathol Behav Assess. 2020;42(3):475–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Graham-Engeland JE, Zawadzki MJ, Slavish DC, Smyth JM. Depressive Symptoms and Momentary Mood Predict Momentary Pain Among Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients. Ann Behav Med. 2016;50(1):12–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Gruber J, Kogan A, Mennin D, Murray G. Real-World Emotion? An Experience-Sampling Approach to Emotion Experience and Regulation in Bipolar I Disorder. J Abnorm Psychol. 2013;122(4):971–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Hahn, L., Eickhoff, S. B., Habel, U., Stickeler, E., Schnakenberg, P., Goecke, T. W., Stickel, S., Franz, M., Dukart, J., & Chechko, N. (2021). Early identification of postpartum depression using demographic, clinical, and digital phenotyping. Transl Psychiatr, 11(121).

  74. Hallensblen, N., Spangenberg, L., Forkmann, Y., Rath, D., Hegerl, U., Kersting, A., Kallert, T. W., Glaesmer, H. (2017). Investigating the Dynamics of Suicidal Ideation. Crisis, 39(1).

  75. Hamilton MA. Development of a rating scale for primary depressive illness. Br J Soc Clin Psychol. 1967;6(4):278–96.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Hamilton JL, S Chand, L Reinhardt, Ladouceur CD, Silk JS, Moreno M, Franzen PL, Bylsma LM,. 2020. Social media use predicts later sleep timing and greater sleep variability: An ecological momentary assessment study of youth at high and low familial risk for depression. J Adolesc. 122–130

  77. Hartmann, J. A., Wichers, M., Menne-Lothmann, C., Kramer, I., Viechtbauer, W., Peeters, F., Schruers, K. R. J., van Bemmel, A., Myin-Germeys, I., Delespaul, P., van Os, J., & Simons, C. J. P. (2015). Experience Sampling-Based Personalized Feedback and Positive Affect: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Depressed Patients. PLoS ONE, 10(6).

  78. Hays RD, Morales LS. The RAND-36 measure of health-related quality of life. Ann Med. 2001;33(5):350–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Heininga, V. E., Dejonckheere, E., Houben, M., Obbels, J., Sienaert, P., Leroy, B., van Roy, J., & Kuppens, P. (2019). The dynamical signature of anhedonia in major depressive disorder: positive emotion dynamics, reactivity, and recovery. BMC Psychiatr, 19(59).

  80. Hepp J, Lane SP, Carpenter RW, Trull TJ. Linking Daily-Life Interpersonal Stressors and Health Problems Via Affective Reactivity in Borderline Personality and Depressive Disorders. Psychosom Med. 2019;82:90–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Heron KE, Smyth JM. Ecological momentary interventions: Incorporating mobile technology into psychosocial and health behavior treatments. Brit J Health Psychol. 2010;15(1):1–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Hershenberg R, Mavandadi S, Wright E,  Thase ME. 2017. Anhedonia in the daily lives of depressed Veterans: A pilot report on experiential avoidance as a moderator of emotional reactivity. J Affect Disord. 414–417

  83. Holmes EA, Bonsall MB, Hales SA, Mitchell H, Renner F, Blackwell SE, Watson P, Goodwin GM, Simplicio Di M,. 2016. Applications of time-series analysis to mood fluctuations in bipolar disorder to promote treatment innovation: a case series .Transl Psychiatry. 6

  84. Hswen, Y., Naslund, J. A., Brownstein, J. S., & Hawkins, J. B. (2018). Online communication about depression and anxiety among twitter users with schizophrenia: preliminary findings to inform a digital phenotype using social media. Psychiatric Quarterly, 89(3), 569–580.

  85. Huckins, J. F., DaSilva, A. W., Wang, W., Hedlund, E., Rogers, C., Nepal, S. K., Wu, J., Obuchi, M., Murphy, E. I., Meyer, M. L., Wagner, D. D., Holtzheimer, P. E., & Campbell, A. T. (2020). Mental Health and Behavior of College Students During the Early Phases of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Longitudinal Smartphone and Ecological Momentary Assessment Study. J Med Int Res, 22(6).

  86. Huffziger S, Ebner-Premier U, Zamoscik V, Reinhard I, Kirsch P, Kuehner C. Effects of mood and rumination on cortisol levels in daily life: An ambulatory assessment study in remitted depressed patients and healthy controls. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2013;38:2258–67.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Huffziger S, Ebner-Premier U, Eisenbach C, Koudela S, Reinhard I, Zamoscik V, Kirsch P, Kuehner C. Induced ruminative and mindful attention in everyday life: An experimental ambulatory assessment study. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2013;44:322–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Hung S, Li M-S, Chen Y-L, Chiang J-H, Chen Y-Y, Hung GC-L,. 2016. Smartphone-based ecological momentary assessment for Chinese patients with depression: An exploratory study in Taiwan Asian. J Psychiatr. 131–136

  89. Husky MM, Mazure CM, Maciejewski PK, Swendsen JD. Past Depression and Gender Interact to Influence Emotional Reactivity to Daily Life Stress. Cognitive Therapy Research. 2009;33:264–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Insel, T. R. (2018). Digital phenotyping: a global tool for psychiatry. World Psychiatry, 17(3), 276.

  91. Jacobson, N. C., Weingarden, H., & Wilhelm, S. (2019). Digital biomarkers of mood disorders and symptom change. Npj digital medicine, 2(3).

  92. Jacobson NC, Weingarden H, Wilhelm S. Using Digital Phenotyping to Accurately Detect Depression Severity. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2019;207(10):893–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Jacobson, N. C., Summers, B., Willhelm, S. (2020). Digital Biomarkers of Social Anxiety Severity: Digital Phenotyping using Passive Smartphone Sensors. J Med Internet Res. Advanced online publication.

  94. Jacobson NC, Chung YJ,. 2020. Passive Sensing of Prediction of Moment-To-Moment Depressed Mood among Undergraduates with Clinical Levels of Depression Sample Using Smartphones Sensors 20

  95. Jaimini, U., Thirunarayan, K., Kalra, M., Venkataraman, R., Kadariya, D., & Sheth, A. (2018). “How Is My Child’s Asthma?” Digital Phenotype and Actionable Insights for Pediatric Asthma. JMIR pediatrics and parenting, 1(2).

  96. Jain, S. H., Powers, B. W., Hawkins, J. B., & Brownstein, J. S. (2015). The digital phenotype. Nature Biotechnol, 33(5), 462–463.

  97. Jean FAM, Swendsen JD, Sibon I, Fehér K, Husky M. Daily Life Behaviors and Depression Risk Following Stroke: A Preliminary Study Using Ecological Momentary Assessment. J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol. 2013;26(3):138–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Joanna Briggs Institute. (2014). Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers’ Manual. JBI.

  99. Kannampallil, T., & Ma, J. (2020). Digital Translucence: Adapting Telemedicine Delivery Post-COVID-19. Telemedicine and e-Health, 26(9).

  100. Kaufmann CN, Gershon A, Eyler LT, Depp CA. Clinical significance of mobile health assessed sleep duration and variability in bipolar disorder. J Psychiatr Res. 2016;81:152–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  101. Kessler RC, Berglund P, Demler O, Jin R, Merikangas KR, Walters EE. Lifetime Prevalence and Age-of-Onset Distributions of DSM-IV Disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005;62:593–602.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Khazanov GK, Ruscio AM, Swendsen J. The “Brightening” Effect: Reactions to Positive Events in the Daily Lives of Individuals with Major Depressive Disorder and Generalized Anxiety Disorder. Behav Ther. 2019;50(2):270–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Kim, J., Nakamura, T., Kikuchi, H., Sasaki, T., Yamamoto, Y. (2013). Co-Variation of Depressive Mood and Locomotor Dynamics Evaluated by Ecological Momentary Assessments in Healthy Humans. PLoS ONE, 8(9).

  104. Kim, J., Nakamura, T., Kikuchi, H., Sasaki, T., Yamamoto, Y. (2014) Co-variation of Depressive Mood and Spontaneous Physical Activity Evaluated by Ecological Momentary Assessment in Major Depressive Disorder. Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC), 36th Annual International Conferences of the IEEE.

  105. Kim, H., Lee, S., Lee, S., Hong, S., Kang, H., & Kim, N. (2019). Depression Prediction by Using Ecological Momentary Assessment, Actiwatch Data, and Machine Learning: Observational Study on Older Adults Living Alone. JMIR MHealth and UHealth, 7(10).

  106. Kircanski K, Thompson RJ, Sorenson JE, Sherdell L, Gotlib IH,. 2015. Rumination and worry in Daily Life: Examining the Naturalistic Validity of Theoretical Constructs. Clinical Psychological Science. 1–14

  107. Kleiman EM, Turner BJ, Fedor SF, Beale EE, Rosalind W, Picard RW, Huffman JC, Nock MK. Digital phenotyping of suicidal thoughts. Depress Anxiety. 2018;35(7):601–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Kovacs M. Rating scales to assess depression in school–aged children. Acta Paedopsychiatrica. International Journal of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. 1981;46:305–15.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  109. Koval, P., Pe, M. L., Meers, K., & Kuppens, P. (2013). Affect Dynamics in Relation to Depressive Symptoms: Variable, Unstable or Inert? Emotion, 13(6), 1132–1141.

  110. Kramer I, Simons CJP, Hartmann JA, Menne-Lothmann C, Viechtbauer W, Peeters F, Schruers K, van Bemmel AL, Myin-Germeys I, Delespaul P, van Os J, Wichers M. World Psychiatry. 2014;13:68–77.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  111. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JBW. The PHQ-9: Validity of a Brief Depression Severity Measure. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16(9):606–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  112. Larsen ME, Boonstra TW, Batterham PJ, O’Dea B, Paris C, Christensen H. We Feel: Mapping emotion on Twitter. IEEE J Biomed Health Inform. 2020;19(4):1246–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  113. Larson, R., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2014). The Experience Sampling Method. In M. Csikszentmihalyi (Ed.), Flow and the Foundations of Positive Psychology: The Collected Works of Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (pp. 21–34). Springer.

  114. Lavender JM, De Young KP, Anestis MD, Wonderlich SA, Crosby RD, Engel SG, Mitchell JE, Crow SJ, Peterson CB, Le Grange D. Associations between retrospective versus ecological momentary assessment measures of emotion and eating disorder symptoms in anorexia nervosa. J Psychiatr Res. 2013;47:1514–20.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  115. Lee EE, Torous J, De Choudhury M, Depp CA, Graham SA, Ho-Cheol K, Paulus MP, Krystal JH, Jeste DV. Artificial intelligence for mental health care: clinical applications, barriers, facilitators, and artificial wisdom. Biol Psychiatry. 2021;6(9):856-64.

  116. Leis, A., Ronzano, F., Mayer, M. A., Furlong, L. I., Sanz, F. (2019). Detecting Signs of Depression in Tweets in Spanish: Behavioral and Linguistic Analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 21(6).

  117. Lewin, K. (1935). A Dynamic Theory of Personality: Selected Papers. McGraw-Hill.

  118. Li X, Zhang Y-T, Huang Z-J, Chen X-L, Yuan F-H, Sun X-J. Diminished Anticipatory and Consummatory Pleasure in Dysphoria: Evidence From an Experience Sampling Study. Front Psychol. 2019;10:2124.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  119. Loi M. The Digital Phenotype: a Philosophical and Ethical Exploration. Philosophy & Technology. 2019;32:155–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  120. Lovibond PF, Lovibond SH. The structure of negative emotional states: Comparison of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) with the Beck Depression and Anxiety Inventories. Behav Res Ther. 1995;33(3):335–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  121. Maher JP, Ra CK, Leventhal AM, Hedeker D, Huh J, Chou C-P, Dunton GF. Mean Level of Positive Affect Moderates Associations between Volatility in Positive Affect, Mental Health, and Alcohol Consumption among Mothers. J Abnorm Psychol. 2018;127(7):639–49.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  122. Mak HW, Schneider S,. 2020. Individual differences in momentary pain-affect coupling and their associations with mental health in patients with chronic pain. J Psychosom Res. 138

  123. Mänikko N, Ruotsalainen H, Miettunen J, Pontes HM, Kääriäinen M. Problematic gaming behavior and health-related outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Health Psychol. 2020;25(1):67–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  124. Marwaha S, Price C, Scott J, Weich S, Cairns A, Dale J, Winsper C, Broome MR. Affective instability in those with and without mental disorders: a case control study. J Affect Disord. 2018;241:492–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  125. Mata J, Thompson RJ, Jaeggi SM, Buschkuehl M, Jonides J, Gotlib IH. Walk on the Bright Side: Physical Activity and Affect in Major Depressive Disorder. J Abnorm Psychol. 2012;121(2):297–308.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  126. McIntyre RS, Lee Y, Rong C, Rosenblat JD, Brietzke E, Pan Z, Park C, Subramaniapillai M, Ragguett R-M, Mansur RB, Lui LMW, Nasri F, Gill H, Berriah S. Ecological momentary assessment of depressive symptoms using the application: Convergence with the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). J Psychiatr Res. 2021;135:311–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  127. McNair PM, Lorr M, Droppleman LF. POMS manual. 2nd ed. San Diego: Educational and Industrial Testing Service; 1981.

  128. Melcher J, Lavoie J, Hays R, D’Mello R, Rauseo-Ricupero N, Camacho E, Rodriguez-Villa E, Wisniewski H, Lagan S, Vaidyam A, Torous J. Digital phenotyping of student mental health during COVID-19: an observational study of 100 college students. J Am Coll Health. 2021.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  129. Mesch, G. (2019). Offline and online relationships. In T. Burns & F. Gottschalk (eds.), Educating 21st Century Children: Emotional Well-being in the Digital Age (pp. 91–102). OECD Publishing.

  130. Minaeva, O., Riese, H., Lamers, F., Antypa, N., Wichers, M., & Booij, S. H. (2020). Screening for Depression in Daily Life: Development and External Validation of a Prediction Model Based on Actigraphy and Experience Sampling Method. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 22(12).

  131. Minaeva O, Booij SH, Lamers F, Antypa N, Schoevers RA, Wichers M, Riese H. Level and timing of physical activity during normal daily life in depressed and non-depressed individuals. Transl Psychiatry. 2020;10:259.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  132. Montgomery S, Asberg M. A new depression scale designed to be sensitive to change. Br J Psychiatry. 1979;134(4):382–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  133. Moreira FP, Jansen K, Mondin TC, de Cardoso T, A., Magalhães, P. V., Kapczinski, F., Frey, B. N., Oses, J. P., Souza, L. D., da Silva, R. A., & Wiener, C. D. Biological rhythms, metabolic syndrome, and current depressive episode in a community sample. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2016;72:34–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  134. Moreno MA, Jelenchick L, Koff R, Eickhoff J. Depression and Internet Use among Older Adolescents: An Experience Sampling Approach. Psychology. 2012;3:743–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  135. Moshe I, Terhorst Y, Asare KO, Sander LB, Ferreira D, Baumeister H, Mohr DC, Pulkki-Råback L,. 2021. Predicting Symptoms of Depression and Anxiety Using Smartphone and Wearable. Data Front Psych. 12

  136. Moukaddam N, Truong A, Cao J, Shah A, Sabharwal A. Findings From a Trial of the Smartphone and OnLine Usage-based eValuation for Depression (SOLVD) Application. J Psychiatr Pract. 2019;25(5):365–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  137. Mowery D, Smith H, Cheney T, Stoddard H, Coppersmith G, Bryan C, Conway M. Understanding Depressive Symptoms and Psychosocial Stressors on Twitter: A Corpus-Based Study. J Med Internet Res. 2017;19(2): e48.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  138. Narziev, N., Goh, H., Toshnazarov, K., Lee, S. A., Chung, K-M., & Noh, Y. (2020). STTD: Short-Term Depression Detection with Passive Sensing. Sensors, 20(5).

  139. Nelson J, Klumparendt A, Doebler P, Ehring T. Everyday Emotional Dynamics in Major Depression. Emotion. 2020;20(2):179–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  140. Nguyen, T., Nguyen, D. T., Larsen, M. E., O’Dea, B., Yearwood, J., Phung, D., Venkatesh, S., Christensen, H. (2017). Prediction of Population Health Indices from Social Media using Kernel-based Textual and Temporal Features. Proceedings of an International World Wide Web Conference Committee (IW3C2). Creative Commons.

  141. Nook, E. C., Flournoy, J. C., Rodman, A. M., Mair, P., & McLaughlin, K. A. (2021). High Emotion Differentiation Buffers Against Internalizing Symptoms Following Exposure to Stressful Life Events in Adolescence: An Intensive Longitudinal Study. Clinical Psychological Science, 9(4).

  142. Nylocks KM, Rafaeli E, Bar-Kalifa E, Flynn JJ, Coifman KG. Testing the influence of negative and positive emotion on future health-promoting behaviors in a community sample. Motiv Emot. 2019;43:285–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  143. Odgers CL, Russell MA. Violence exposure is associated with adolescents’ same- and next-day mental health symptoms. The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. 2017;58(12):1310–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  144. O’Leary K, Small BJ, Panaite V, Bylsma LM, Rottenberg J. Sleep quality in healthy and mood-disordered persons predicts daily life emotional reactivity. Cogn Emot. 2017;31(3):435–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  145. Onella J-P, Rauch SL. Harnessing Smartphone-Based Digital Phenotyping to Enhance Behavioral and Mental Health. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2016;41:1691–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  146. Onella J-P. Opportunities and challenges in the collection and analysis of digital phenotyping data. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2021;46:45–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  147. Panaite V, Whittington A, Cowden Hindash A. The role of appraisal in dysphoric affect reactivity to positive laboratory films and daily life events in depression. Cogn Emot. 2018;32(6):1362–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  148. Panaite V, Koval P, Dejonckheere E, Kuppens P. Emotion regulation and mood brightening in daily life vary with depressive symptom levels. Cogn Emot. 2019;33(6):1291–301.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  149. Pastor, N., Khalilian, E., Cabelleria, E., Morrison, D., Sanchez Luque, U., Matrai, S., Gual, A., López-Pelayo, H. (2020). Remote Monitoring Telemedicine (REMOTE) Platform for Patients with Anxiety Symptoms and Alcohol Use Disorder: Protocol for a Case-Control Study. JMIR Research Protocols, 9(6).

  150. Pasyugina I, Koval P, De Leernsnyder D, Mesquita B, Kuppens P. Distinguishing between level and impact of rumination as predictors of depressive symptoms: An experience sampling study. Cogn Emot. 2015;29(4):736–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  151. Pe ML, Kircanski K, Thompson RJ, Bringmann LF, Tuerlinckx F, Mestdagh M, Mata J, Jaeggi SM, Buschkuehl M, Jonides J, Kuppens P, Gotlib IH. 2014. Emotion-Network Density in Major Depressive Disorder Clinical Psychological Science 1–9

  152. P Pedrelli S Fedor A Ghandeharioun E Howe DF Ionescu D Bhatehna LB Fisher C Cusin M Nyer A Yeung L Sangermano D Mischoulon JE Alpert RW Picard 2020 Monitoring Changes in Depression Severity Using Wearable and Mobile Sensors Front Psych 11

  153. Peterson CB, Engel SG, Crosby RD, Strauman T, Smith TL, Klein M, Crow SJ, Mitchell JE, Erickson A, Cao L, Bjorlie K, Wonderlich SA. 2020. Comparing integrative cognitive-affective therapy and guided self-help cognitive-behavioral therapy to treat binge-eating disorder using standard and naturalistic momentary outcome measures: A randomized controlled trial. Int J Eat Disord. 1–10

  154. Place S, Blanch-Hartigan D, Rubin C, Gorrostieta C, Mead C, Kane J, Marx BP, Feast J, Deckersbach T, Pentland A, Nierenberg A, Azarbayejani A. Behavioral Indicators on a Mobile Sensing Platform Predict Clinically Validated Psychiatric Symptoms of Mood and Anxiety Disorders. J Med Internet Res. 2017;19(3): e75.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  155. Putnam KM, McSweeney LB. Depressive symptoms and baseline prefrontal EEG alpha activity: A study utilizing Ecological Momentary Assessment. Biol Psychol. 2008;77:237–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  156. Radloff LS. The CESD-D Scale: A Self-Report Depression Scale for Research in General Population. Appl Psychol Meas. 1977;1(3):385–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  157. Robbins ML, Mehl MR, Holleran SE, Kasle S. Naturalistically Observed Sighing and Depression in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients: A Preliminary Study. Health Psychol. 2011;30(1):129–33.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  158. Rodriguez M, Aalbers G, McNally RJ. Idiographic Network Models of Social Media Use and Depression Symptoms. Cogn Ther Res. 2021.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  159. Rush AJ, Gullion CM, Basco MR, Jarrett RB, Trivedi MH. The Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (IDS): psychometric properties. Psychol Med. 2009;26:477–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  160. Sagar, K. A., Dahlgren, M. K., Racine, M. T., Dreman, M. W., Olson, D. P., & Gruber, S. A. (2016). Joint Effects: A Pilot Investigation of the Impact of Bipolar Disorder and Marijuana Use on Cognitive Function and Mood. PLoS ONE, 11(6).

  161. Sano A, Taylor S, McHill AW, Phillips AJK, Barger LK, Klerman E, Picard R. Identifying Objective Physiological Markers and Modifiable Behaviors for Self-Reported Stress and Mental Health Status Using Wearable Sensors and Mobile Phones: Observational Study. J Med Internet Res. 2018;20(6): e210.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  162. Schultebraucks K, Yadav V, Shalev AY, Bonanno GA, Galatzer-Levy IR. 2020 .Deep learning-based classification of posttraumatic stress disorder and depression following trauma utilizing visual and auditory markers of arousal and mood. Psychol Med. 1–11

  163. Sears MS, Niles AN, Repetti RL. Emotional and Social Reactivity as Mechanisms of Stress Generation: A Momentary Assessment Study. J Soc Clin Psychol. 2018;37(3):201–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  164. Sequeira L, Battaglia M, Perrotta S, Merikangas K, Strauss J. Digital Phenotyping with Mobile and Wearable Devices: Advanced Symptom Measurement in Child and Adolescent Depression. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2019;58(9):841–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  165. Sheehan, D. V., Lecrubier, Y., Sheehan, K. H., Amorim, P., Janavs, J., Weiller, E., Hergueta, T., & Dunbar, G. C. (1998). The Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (M.I.N.I.): The development and validation of a structured diagnostic psychiatric intervie for DSM-IV and ICD-10. J Clin Psychiatr, 59(20), 22–33.

  166. Sheets ES, Armey MF. Daily Interpersonal and Noninterpersonal Stress Reactivity in Current and Remitted Depression. Cogn Ther Res. 2020;44:774–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  167. Snippe E, Simons CJP, Hartmann JA, Menne-Lothmann C, Kramer I, Booij SH, Viechtbauer W, Delespaul P, Myin-Germeys I, Wichers M. Change in Daily Life Behaviors and Depression: Within-Person and Between-Person Associations. Health Psychol. 2016;35(5):433–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  168. Sperry SH, Kwapil TR, Eddington KM, Silvia PJ. Psychopathology, everyday behaviors, and autonomic activity in daily life: An ambulatory impedance cardiography study of depression, anxiety, and hypomanic traits. Int J Psychophysiol. 2018;129:67–75.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  169. Stange JP, Zulueta J, Langenecker SA, Kelly A, Piscitello A, Duffecy J, McInnis MG, Nelson P, Ajilore O, Leow A. Let your fingers do the talking: Passive typing instability predicts future mood outcomes. Bipolar Disord. 2018;20:285–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  170. Stasak B, Epps J, Goecke R. Automatic depression classification based on affective read sentences: Opportunities for text-dependent analysis. Speech Commun. 2019;115:1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  171. Steenkamp L, Weijers J, Gerrmann J, Eurelings-Bontekoe E, Selten J-P. The relationship between childhood abuse and severity of psychosis is mediated by loneliness: an experience sampling study. Schizophr Res. 2019.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  172. Thompson RJ, Kuppens P, Mata J, Jaeggi SM, Busckuehl M, Jonides J. Emotional Clarity as a Function of Neuroticism and Major Depressive Disorder. Emotion. 2015;15(5):615–24.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  173. Thompson RJ, Kircanski K, Gotlib IH. The grass is not as green as you think: Affect evaluation in people with internalizing disorders. J Affect Disord. 2016;203:233–40.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  174. Thompson RJ, Spectre A, Insel PS, Mennin D, Gotlib IH, Gruber J. Positive and Negative Affective Forecasting in Remitted Individuals with Bipolar I Disorder, and Major Depressive Disorder, and Healthy Controls. Cognitive Ther Res. 2017;41:673–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  175. Thorstad R, Wolff P. Predicting future mental illness from social media: A big-data approach. Behav Res Methods. 2019;51:1586–600.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  176. Tole, A. A. (2013). Big Data Challenges. Database Systems Journal, 4(3), 31–41.

  177. Torous J, Staples P, Onnela J-P. Realizing the Potential of Mobile Mental Health: New Methods for New Data in Psychiatry. Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2015;17(61):60–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  178. Torous J, Kiang MV, Lorne J, Onnela J-P. New tools for New Research in Psychiatry: A Scalable and Customisable Platform to Empower Data Driven Smartphone Research. JMIR Mental Health. 2016;3(2): e16.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  179. Torous J, Onnela J-P, Keshevan M. New dimensions and new tools to realize the potential of RDoC: digital phenotyping via smartphones and connected devices. Transl Psychiatry. 2017;7. 10.1038/tp.2017.25.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  180. Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O’Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, Moher D, Peters MD, Horsley T, Weeks L, Hempel S. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  181. Trull TJ, Solhan MB, Tragesser SL, Jahng S, Wood PK, Piasecki TM, Watson D. Affective Instability: Measuring a Core Feature of Borderline Personality Disorder With Ecological Momentary Assessment. J Abnorm Psychol. 2008;117(3):647–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  182. Trull TJ, Ebner-Premier E. Ambulatory Assessment. Ann Rev Clin Psychol. 2013;9:151–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  183. van Roekel E, Bennik EC, Bastiaansen J, A., Verhagen, M., Ormel, J., Engels, R. C. M. E., & Oldehinkel, A. J. 2016. Depressive Symptoms and the Experience of Pleasure in Daily Life: An Exploration of Associations in Early and Late Adolescence. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 44 999 1009

  184. Vansteeltandt K, Houben M, Claes L, Berens A. Self-criticism and dependency predict affective variability in borderline personality disorder: An ecological momentary assessment study. Personal Disord Theory Res Treat. 2019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  185. Vares, E. A., Salum, G. A., Spanemberg, L., Calderiaro, M. A., Fleck, M. P. (2015). Depression Dimensions: Integrating Clinical Signs and Symptoms from the Perspectives of Clinicians and Patients. PLoS ONE, 10(8). http://

  186. Verkuil B, Brosschot JF, Marques AH, Kampschroer K, Sternberg EM, Thayer JF. Gender differences in the impact of daily sadness on 24-h heart rate variability. Psychophysiology. 2015;52:1682–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  187. Vesel C, Rashidisabet H, Zulueta J, Stange JP, Duffecy J, Hussain F, Piscitello A, Bark J, Langenecker SA, Young S, Leow A. 2020. Effects of mood and aging on keystroke dynamics metadata and their diurnal patters in a large open-science sample: A BiAffect iOS study. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1–12

  188. Vranceanu A, Gallo LC, Bogart LM. Depressive symptoms and momentary affect: the role of social interaction variables. Depress Anxiety. 2009;26:464–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  189. Wahle, F., Kowatsch, T., Fleisch, E., Rufer, M., & Weidt, S. (2016). Mobile Sensing and Support for People with Depression: A Pilot Trial in the Wild. JMIR MHealth and UHealth, 4(3).

  190. Wang X, Blain SD, Meng J, Liu Y, Qiu J. Variability in emotion regulation strategy use is negatively associated with depressive symptoms. Cogn Emot. 2021;35(2):324–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  191. Wenze SJ, Gunthert KC, Forand NR. Influence of dysphoria on positive and negative cognitive reactivity to daily mood fluctuations. Behav Res Ther. 2006;45:915–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  192. Wenze SJ, Gunthert KC, Forand NR, Laurenceau J-P. The influence of Dysphoria on Reactivity to Naturalistic Fluctuations in Anger. J Pers. 2006;77(3):796–824.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  193. Wenze SJ, Gunthert KC, German RE. Biases in Affective Forecasting and Recall in Individuals with Depression and Anxiety Symptoms. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2012;38(7):895–906.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  194. Wenze SJ, Gaugler TK, Sheets ES, DeCicco JM. Momentary experiential avoidance: Within-person correlates, antecedents, and consequences and between-person moderators. Behav Res Ther. 2018;107:42–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  195. Wiederhold BK. Using Your Digital Phenotype to Improve Your Mental Health. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2016;19(7):419.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  196. Worthen-Chaudhari L, McGonigal J, Logan J, Bockbrader MA, Yeates KO, Mysiw WJ. Reducing concussion symptoms among teenage youth: Evaluation of a mobile health app. Brain Inj. 2017;31(10):1279–86.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  197. Wu H, Mata J, Furman DJ, Whitmer AJ, Gotlib IH, Thompson RJ. Anticipatory and Consummatory Pleasure and Displeasure in Major Depressive Disorder: An Experience Sampling Study. J Abnorm Psychol. 2016;126(2):149–59.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  198. Zhang L, Duvvuri R, Chandra KKL, Nguyen T, Ghomi RH. Automated voice biomarkers for depression symptoms using an online cross-sectional data collection initiative. Depress Anxiety. 2020;37:657–69.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  199. Zimmerman M, Sheeran T, Young D. The Diagnostic Inventory for Depression: A self-report scale to diagnose DSM-IV major depressive disorder. J Clin Psychol. 2003;60(1):87–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  200. Zulueta J, Piscitello A, Rasic M, Easter R, Babu P, Langenecker SA, McInnis M, Ajilore O, Nelson PC, Ryan K, Leow A. Predicting Mood Disturbance Severity with Mobile Phone Keystroke Metadata: A Biaffect Digital Phenotyping Study. J Med Internet Res. 2018;20(7): e241.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references


The authors would like to acknowledge the fantastic work of this wonderful team. Additionally, Figures presented here were produced by Casandra graphics (


DZ received the IHES, Victoria University, Research Training Program Stipend Scholarship, Victoria University. VS received the Australian Research Council, Discovery Early Career Researcher Aw, Grant/Award Number: DE210101107. Open Access funding enabled and organized by CAUL and its Member Institutions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations



DZ contributed to the article’s conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, methodology, project administration, and writing of the original draft. VS contributed to data curation, article conceptualization, writing of the original draft, review, editing the final draft and project administration. MB contributed to the article’s conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, methodology, project administration, and writing and editing of drafts. GdSC contributed to formal analysis, reviewing, and editing the final draft. NCJ contributed to writing, reviewing, and editing the final draft. The authors read and approved the final manuscript. 

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel Zarate.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

All studies included in this review that performed procedures involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

VS serves as associate editor of BMC. He declares no financial conflicts of interest. The authors of the present study do not report any conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The original version of this article was revised: figures, font size, and footnote have been corrected.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1.

 Prisma 2009 Checklist

Additional file 2.

Supplementary Tables

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zarate, D., Stavropoulos, V., Ball, M. et al. Exploring the digital footprint of depression: a PRISMA systematic literature review of the empirical evidence. BMC Psychiatry 22, 421 (2022).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: