MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4312947738 · doi:10.2196/43241

Promoting Hand Hygiene During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Parallel Randomized Trial for the Optimization of the Soapp App

2022· article· en· W4312947738 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dario Baretta, Melanie Alexandra Amrein, Carole Bäder, Gian Giacomo Ruschetti, María del Río Carral, Carlo Fabian, Jennifer Inauen

Notice bibliographique

RevueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2022
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueInfection Control and Ventilation
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesUniversity of Bern
Mots-clésRandomized controlled trialHygieneMedicineContext (archaeology)BlindingPandemicPublic healthPopulationPsychological interventionIntervention (counseling)Environmental healthFamily medicineNursingCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)DiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)SurgeryPathology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Hand hygiene is an effective behavior for preventing the spread of the respiratory disease COVID-19 and was included in public health guidelines worldwide. Behavior change interventions addressing hand hygiene have the potential to support the adherence to public health recommendations and, thereby, prevent the spread of COVID-19. However, randomized trials are largely absent during a pandemic; therefore, there is little knowledge about the most effective strategies to promote hand hygiene during an ongoing pandemic. This study addresses this gap by presenting the results of the optimization phase of a Multiphase Optimization Strategy of Soapp, a smartphone app for promoting hand hygiene in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify the most effective combination and sequence of 3 theory- and evidence-based intervention modules (habit, motivation, and social norms) for promoting hand hygiene. To this end, 9 versions of Soapp were developed (conditions), and 2 optimization criteria were defined: the condition with the largest increase in hand hygiene at follow-up and condition with the highest engagement, usability, and satisfaction based on quantitative and qualitative analyses. METHODS: This study was a parallel randomized trial with 9 intervention conditions defined by the combination of 2 intervention modules and their sequence. The trial was conducted from March to August 2021 with interested participants from the Swiss general population (N=232; randomized). Randomization was performed using Qualtrics (Qualtrics International Inc), and blinding was ensured. The duration of the intervention was 34 days. The primary outcome was self-reported hand hygiene at follow-up, which was assessed using an electronic diary. The secondary outcomes were user engagement, usability, and satisfaction assessed at follow-up. Nine participants were further invited to participate in semistructured exit interviews. A set of ANOVAs was performed to test the main hypotheses, whereas a thematic analysis was performed to analyze the qualitative data. RESULTS: The results showed a significant increase in hand hygiene over time across all conditions. There was no interaction effect between time and intervention condition. Similarly, no between-group differences in engagement, usability, and satisfaction emerged. Seven themes (eg, "variety and timeliness of the task load" and "social interaction") were found in the thematic analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The effectiveness of Soapp in promoting hand hygiene laid the foundation for the next evaluation phase of the app. More generally, the study supported the value of digital interventions in pandemic contexts. The findings showed no differential effect of intervention conditions involving different combinations and sequences of the habit, motivation, and social norms modules on hand hygiene, engagement, usability, and satisfaction. In the absence of quantitative differences, we relied on the results from the thematic analysis to select the best version of Soapp for the evaluation phase. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04830761; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04830761. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2021-055971.

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)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Essai randomisé · Signal consensuel: Essai randomisé
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,169
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,059
Tête enseignante GPT0,373
Écart entre enseignants0,314 · 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'étudeEssai randomisé
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

Citations15
Publié2022
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJMIR mhealth and uhealthMême sujetInfection Control and VentilationTravaux en français237 207