The Relationship Between How Participants Articulate Their Goals and Accomplishments and Weight Loss Outcomes: Secondary Analysis of a Pilot of a Web-Based Weight Loss Intervention
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: In behavioral weight loss interventions, participants are asked to set weekly goals to support long-term habits that lead to weight loss. Although participants are asked to set and accomplish weekly goals, we do not know how often they do this and whether doing so is associated with weight loss. Web-based weight loss interventions allow for the analysis of participant engagement data, including how participants articulate their goals and accomplishments. OBJECTIVE: Using engagement data from a web-based weight loss intervention, we examined whether participants articulating their goals and accomplishments in measurable and repeating terms were associated with greater weight loss. METHODS: Adults with overweight or obesity received a 12-week Facebook-delivered weight loss intervention based on the Diabetes Prevention Program Lifestyle Intervention. Participants replied to conversation threads that queried about their goals and accomplishments. Two independent coders classified participants' posts that articulated goals or accomplishments as measurable or repeating. Crude and age-adjusted linear regression models were used to examine the relationship between the frequency of post type and percent weight loss. RESULTS: . Over 12 weeks, participants shared a median of 4 (IQR 1-8) posts that reported goals and 10 (IQR 4-24) posts that reported accomplishments. Most participants shared ≥1 post with a goal (n=43, 81%) and ≥1 post with an accomplishment (n=47, 89%). Each post reporting a goal was associated with 0.2% greater weight loss (95% CI -0.3% to 0.0%). Sharing ≥1 post with a repeating goal was associated with an average of 2.2% greater weight loss (95% CI -3.9% to -0.4%). Each post with a repeating goal was associated with an average of 0.5% greater weight loss (95% CI -1.0% to 0.0%). Sharing ≥1 post with measurable and repeating goals was associated with an average of 1.9% greater weight loss (95% CI -3.7% to -0.2%). Sharing each post with an accomplishment was associated with an average of 0.1% greater weight loss (95% CI -0.1% to 0.0%). Every post with an accomplishment that was repeating was associated with an average of 0.2% greater weight loss (95% CI -0.3% to 0.0%). Sharing other types of goals and accomplishments was not associated with weight loss. CONCLUSIONS: In a web-based weight loss intervention, stating goals in repeating or both measurable and repeating terms was associated with greater weight loss, but simply stating them in measurable terms was not. For accomplishments, only those articulated in repeating terms were associated with greater weight loss. Posts about one-time goals and accomplishments represent an opportunity to encourage planning for future behaviors. Future research should examine if stating goals and accomplishments in repeating terms signals habit formation.
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 | 0,009 | 0,031 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 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 ».