Evaluating the Impact of Adaptive Personalized Goal Setting on Engagement Levels of Government Staff With a Gamified mHealth Tool: Results From a 2-Month Randomized Controlled Trial
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Although the health benefits of physical activity are well established, it remains challenging for people to adopt a more active lifestyle. Mobile health (mHealth) interventions can be effective tools to promote physical activity and reduce sedentary behavior. Promising results have been obtained by using gamification techniques as behavior change strategies, especially when they were tailored toward an individual's preferences and goals; yet, it remains unclear how goals could be personalized to effectively promote health behaviors. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we aim to evaluate the impact of personalized goal setting in the context of gamified mHealth interventions. We hypothesize that interventions suggesting health goals that are tailored based on end users' (self-reported) current and desired capabilities will be more engaging than interventions with generic goals. METHODS: The study was designed as a 2-arm randomized intervention trial. Participants were recruited among staff members of 7 governmental organizations. They participated in an 8-week digital health promotion campaign that was especially designed to promote walks, bike rides, and sports sessions. Using an mHealth app, participants could track their performance on two social leaderboards: a leaderboard displaying the individual scores of participants and a leaderboard displaying the average scores per organizational department. The mHealth app also provided a news feed that showed when other participants had scored points. Points could be collected by performing any of the 6 assigned tasks (eg, walk for at least 2000 m). The level of complexity of 3 of these 6 tasks was updated every 2 weeks by changing either the suggested task intensity or the suggested frequency of the task. The 2 intervention arms-with participants randomly assigned-consisted of a personalized treatment that tailored the complexity parameters based on participants' self-reported capabilities and goals and a control treatment where the complexity parameters were set generically based on national guidelines. Measures were collected from the mHealth app as well as from intake and posttest surveys and analyzed using hierarchical linear models. RESULTS: The results indicated that engagement with the program inevitably dropped over time. However, engagement was higher for participants who had set themselves a goal in the intake survey. The impact of personalization was especially observed for frequency parameters because the personalization of sports session frequency did foster higher engagement levels, especially when participants set a goal to improve their capabilities. In addition, the personalization of suggested ride duration had a positive effect on self-perceived biking performance. CONCLUSIONS: Personalization seems particularly promising for promoting the frequency of physical activity (eg, promoting the number of suggested sports sessions per week), as opposed to the intensity of the physical activity (eg, distance or duration). Replications and variations of our study setup are critical for consolidating and explaining (or refuting) these effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05264155; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05264155.
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 | 0,008 | 0,012 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,001 |
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 ».