Acceptability, usefulness, and satisfaction with a web-based video-tailored physical activity intervention: The TaylorActive randomized controlled trial
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
PURPOSE: This study aimed to examine the usage, acceptability, usability, perceived usefulness, and satisfaction of a web-based video-tailored physical activity (PA) intervention (TaylorActive) in adults. METHODS: In 2013-2014, 501 Australian adults aged 18+ years were randomized into a video-tailored intervention, text-tailored intervention, or control group. Over 3 months, the intervention groups received access to 8 sessions of personally tailored PA advice delivered via the TaylorActive website. Only the delivery method differed between the intervention groups: video-tailored vs. text-tailored. Google Analytics and telephone surveys conducted at post intervention (3 months) were used to assess intervention usage, acceptability, usability, perceived usefulness, and satisfaction. Quantitative and qualitative process data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and thematic content analysis. RESULTS: Of 501 recruited adults, 259 completed the 3-month post-intervention survey (52% retention). Overall, usage of the TaylorActive website with respect to number of website visits, intervention sessions, and action plans completed was modest in both the video-tailored (7.6 ± 7.2 visits, mean ± SD) and text-tailored (7.3 ± 5.4 visits) groups with no significant between-group differences. The majority of participants in all groups used the TaylorActive website less than once in 2 weeks (66.7% video-tailored, 62.7% text-tailored, 87.5% control; p < 0.001). Acceptability was rated mostly high in all groups and, in some instances, significantly higher in the intervention groups compared to the control group (p < 0.010). Usability was also rated high; mean Systems Usability Scores were 77.3 (video-tailored), 75.7 (text-tailored), and 74.1 (control) with no significant between-group differences. Perceived usefulness of the TaylorActive intervention was low, though mostly rated higher in the intervention groups compared to the control group (p < 0.010). Satisfaction with the TaylorActive website was mixed. Participants in both intervention groups liked its ease of use, personalized feedback, and tracking of progress, but also found completing action plans and survey questions for each session repetitive and tedious. CONCLUSION: Providing personally tailored PA advice on its own (through either video or text) is likely insufficient to ensure good retention, usage, perceived usefulness, and satisfaction with a web-based PA intervention. Strategies to address this may include the incorporation of additional intervention components such as activity trackers, social interactions, gamification, as well as the use of advanced artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies to allow more personalized dialogue with participants.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,018 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».