Just-in-Time Prompts for Running, Walking, and Performing Strength Exercises in the Built Environment: 4-Week Randomized Feasibility Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: App-based mobile health exercise interventions can motivate individuals to engage in more physical activity (PA). According to the Fogg Behavior Model, it is important that the individual receive prompts at the right time to be successfully persuaded into PA. These are referred to as just-in-time (JIT) interventions. The Playful Active Urban Living (PAUL) app is among the first to include 2 types of JIT prompts: JIT adaptive reminder messages to initiate a run or walk and JIT strength exercise prompts during a walk or run (containing location-based instruction videos). This paper reports on the feasibility of the PAUL app and its JIT prompts. OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this study was to examine user experience, app engagement, and users' perceptions and opinions regarding the PAUL app and its JIT prompts and to explore changes in the PA behavior, intrinsic motivation, and the perceived capability of the PA behavior of the participants. METHODS: In total, 2 versions of the closed-beta version of the PAUL app were evaluated: a basic version (Basic PAUL) and a JIT adaptive version (Smart PAUL). Both apps send JIT exercise prompts, but the versions differ in that the Smart PAUL app sends JIT adaptive reminder messages to initiate running or walking behavior, whereas the Basic PAUL app sends reminder messages at randomized times. A total of 23 participants were randomized into 1 of the 2 intervention arms. PA behavior (accelerometer-measured), intrinsic motivation, and the perceived capability of PA behavior were measured before and after the intervention. After the intervention, participants were also asked to complete a questionnaire on user experience, and they were invited for an exit interview to assess user perceptions and opinions of the app in depth. RESULTS: No differences in PA behavior were observed (Z=-1.433; P=.08), but intrinsic motivation for running and walking and for performing strength exercises significantly increased (Z=-3.342; P<.001 and Z=-1.821; P=.04, respectively). Furthermore, participants increased their perceived capability to perform strength exercises (Z=2.231; P=.01) but not to walk or run (Z=-1.221; P=.12). The interviews indicated that the participants were enthusiastic about the strength exercise prompts. These were perceived as personal, fun, and relevant to their health. The reminders were perceived as important initiators for PA, but participants from both app groups explained that the reminder messages were often not sent at times they could exercise. Although the participants were enthusiastic about the functionalities of the app, technical issues resulted in a low user experience. CONCLUSIONS: The preliminary findings suggest that the PAUL apps are promising and innovative interventions for promoting PA. Users perceived the strength exercise prompts as a valuable addition to exercise apps. However, to be a feasible intervention, the app must be more stable.
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 | 0,007 | 0,008 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,010 | 0,002 |
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 ».