Human Factors in AI-Driven Digital Solutions for Increasing Physical Activity: Scoping Review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to enhance physical activity (PA) interventions. However, human factors (HFs) play a pivotal role in the successful integration of AI into mobile health (mHealth) solutions for promoting PA. Understanding and optimizing the interaction between individuals and AI-driven mHealth apps is essential for achieving the desired outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to review and describe the current evidence on the HFs in AI-driven digital solutions for increasing PA. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review by searching for publications containing terms related to PA, HFs, and AI in the titles and abstracts across 3 databases-PubMed, Embase, and IEEE Xplore-and Google Scholar. Studies were included if they were primary studies describing an AI-based solution aimed at increasing PA, and results from testing the solution were reported. Studies that did not meet these criteria were excluded. Additionally, we searched the references in the included articles for relevant research. The following data were extracted from included studies and incorporated into a qualitative synthesis: bibliographic information, study characteristics, population, intervention, comparison, outcomes, and AI-related information. The certainty of the evidence in the included studies was evaluated using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). RESULTS: A total of 15 studies published between 2015 and 2023 involving 899 participants aged approximately between 19 and 84 years, 60.7% (546/899) of whom were female participants, were included in this review. The interventions lasted between 2 and 26 weeks in the included studies. Recommender systems were the most commonly used AI technology in digital solutions for PA (10/15 studies), followed by conversational agents (4/15 studies). User acceptability and satisfaction were the HFs most frequently evaluated (5/15 studies each), followed by usability (4/15 studies). Regarding automated data collection for personalization and recommendation, most systems involved fitness trackers (5/15 studies). The certainty of the evidence analysis indicates moderate certainty of the effectiveness of AI-driven digital technologies in increasing PA (eg, number of steps, distance walked, or time spent on PA). Furthermore, AI-driven technology, particularly recommender systems, seems to positively influence changes in PA behavior, although with very low certainty evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Current research highlights the potential of AI-driven technologies to enhance PA, though the evidence remains limited. Longer-term studies are necessary to assess the sustained impact of AI-driven technologies on behavior change and habit formation. While AI-driven digital solutions for PA hold significant promise, further exploration into optimizing AI's impact on PA and effectively integrating AI and HFs is crucial for broader benefits. Thus, the implications for innovation management involve conducting long-term studies, prioritizing diversity, ensuring research quality, focusing on user experience, and understanding the evolving role of AI in PA promotion.
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 | 0,017 | 0,072 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,005 | 0,006 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,018 | 0,016 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 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 ».