MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2907621839 · doi:10.2196/10731

The Development of VegEze: Smartphone App to Increase Vegetable Consumption in Australian Adults

2018· article· en· W2907621839 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gilly A. Hendrie, Genevieve James‐Martin, Gemma Williams, Emily Brindal, Ben Whyte, Anna Crook

Notice bibliographique

RevueJMIR Formative Research · 2018
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesFlinders UniversityCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
Mots-clésUsabilitySession (web analytics)Product (mathematics)Smartphone appBehavior changeGeneral partnershipPsychological interventionConsumption (sociology)Behavior change methodsComputer sciencePsychologyApplied psychologyInternet privacyBusinessWorld Wide WebHuman–computer interactionSocial psychologyMathematics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Poor-quality dietary patterns are often characterized by inadequate consumption of fruits and vegetables. Changing dietary behavior is difficult, and although it is often clear what needs to change, how to enact change is more difficult. Smartphones have characteristics that may support the complexity of changing dietary behavior. OBJECTIVE: This paper describes the iterative process of developing a theory-based smartphone app called VegEze that aimed to increase vegetable consumption. METHODS: To upscale, reach target users, and create a user-friendly end product, a collaborative research-industry partnership was formed to build the app over a 20-week period. The Integrate, Design, Assess, and Share framework was used as a scientific basis to guide the development. The behavior change wheel was also used as a theoretical grounding in combination with other theory-based strategies, such as self-monitoring, social comparison, and gamification-which have all been shown to be successful in dietary change or digital health interventions. We conducted 1 consumer survey (N=1068), 1 usability testing session (N=11), and a pilot effectiveness and usability trial (N=283) to inform the design of the app. RESULTS: The target behavior for the app was defined as having 3 different types of vegetables at dinner. The perceived achievability of this target behavior was high; 93% of respondents (993/1068 users) felt they were likely or very likely to be able to regularly achieve the behavior. App features that users wanted included the following: recipes and meal ideas (876/1068, 82% of users), functionality to track their intake (662/1068, 62%), and information on how to prepare vegetables (545/1068, 51%). On the basis of importance of self-monitoring as a behavior change technique (BCT) and its rating by users, the vegetable tracker was a core feature of the app and was designed to be quick and simple to use. Daily feedback messages for logging intake and communicating progress were designed to be engaging and fun, using friendly, positive language and emoji icons. Daily and weekly feedback on vegetable consumption was designed to be simple, informative, and reinforce monitoring. A creative team was engaged to assist in the branding of the app to ensure it had an identity that reflected the fun and simple nature of the underlying behavior. The app included 16 BCTs, most of which were from the goals and planning subsection of the BCT taxonomy. CONCLUSIONS: Combining a theoretical framework with an industry perspective and input resulted in an app that was developed in a timely manner while retaining its evidence-base. VegEze is an iOS app currently available in the App Store, and the overall impact of the VegEze app will be evaluated in an uncontrolled, quantitative study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12618000481279; http://www.anzctr.org.au/TrialSearch.aspx?searchTxt=ACTRN12618000481279 (Archived by WebCite: at http://www.webcitation.org/769oG9EaA).

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,006
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,330
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0060,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,004

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,130
Tête enseignante GPT0,531
Écart entre enseignants0,401 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations20
Publié2018
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJMIR Formative ResearchMême sujetMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsTravaux en français237 207