An App-Based Intervention With Behavioral Support to Promote Brisk Walking in People Diagnosed With Breast, Prostate, or Colorectal Cancer (APPROACH): Process Evaluation Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The APPROACH pilot study explored the feasibility and acceptability of an app (NHS Active 10) with brief, habit-based, behavioral support calls and print materials intended to increase brisk walking in people diagnosed with cancer. OBJECTIVE: Following UK Medical Research Council guidelines, this study assessed the implementation of the intervention, examined the mechanisms of impact, and identified contextual factors influencing engagement. METHODS: Adults (aged ≥18 y) with breast, prostate, or colorectal cancer who reported not meeting the UK guidelines for moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (≥150 min/wk) were recruited from a single hospital site in Yorkshire, United Kingdom. They were randomly assigned to the intervention or control (usual care) arm and assessed via quantitative surveys at baseline (time point 0 [T0]) and 3-month follow-up (time point 1 [T1]) and qualitative exit interviews (36/44, 82%) at T1. The process evaluation included intervention participants only (n=44). Implementation was assessed using data from the T1 questionnaire exploring the use of the intervention components. The perceived usefulness of the app, leaflet, and behavioral support call was rated from 0 to 5. Behavioral support calls were recorded, and the fidelity of delivery of 25 planned behavior change techniques was rated from 0 to 5 using an adapted Dreyfus scale. Mechanisms of impact were identified by examining T0 and T1 scores on the Self-Reported Behavioural Automaticity Index and feedback on the leaflet, app, call, and planner in the T1 questionnaire and qualitative interviews. Contextual factors influencing engagement were identified through qualitative interviews. RESULTS: The implementation of the intervention was successful: 98% (43/44) of the participants received a behavioral support call, 78% (32/41) reported reading the leaflet, 95% (39/41) reported downloading the app, and 83% (34/41) reported using the planners. The mean perceived usefulness of the app was 4.3 (SD 0.8) in participants still using the app at T1 (n=33). Participants rated the leaflet (mean 3.9, SD 0.6) and the behavioral support call (mean 4.1, SD 1) as useful. The intended behavior change techniques in the behavioral support calls were proficiently delivered (overall mean 4.2, SD 1.2). Mechanisms of impact included habit formation, behavioral monitoring, and support and reassurance from the intervention facilitator. Contextual factors impacting engagement included barriers, such as the impact of cancer and its treatment, and facilitators, such as social support. CONCLUSIONS: The APPROACH intervention was successfully implemented and shows promise for increasing brisk walking, potentially through promoting habit formation and enabling self-monitoring. Contextual factors will be important to consider when interpreting outcomes in the larger APPROACH randomized controlled trial. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1186/s40814-022-01028-w.
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 | 0,014 | 0,014 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 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 | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
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.
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 ».