Examining Participant Engagement in an Information Technology-Based Physical Activity and Nutrition Intervention for Men: The Manup Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Males experience a shorter life expectancy and higher rates of chronic diseases compared to their female counterparts. To improve health outcomes among males, interventions specifically developed for males that target their health behaviors are needed. Information technology (IT)-based interventions may be a promising intervention approach in this population group, however, little is known about how to maximize engagement and retention in Web-based programs. OBJECTIVE: The current study sought to explore attributes hypothesized to influence user engagement among a subsample of participants from the ManUp study, a randomized controlled trial testing the efficacy of an interactive Web-based intervention for promoting physical activity and nutrition among middle-aged males. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted and audiotaped with 20 of the ManUp participants. Interview questions were based on a conceptual model of engagement and centered on why participants took part in the study, what they liked and did not like about the intervention they received, and how they think the intervention could be improved. Interview recordings were transcribed and coded into themes. RESULTS: There were five themes that were identified in the study. These themes were: (1) users' motives, (2) users' desired outcomes, (3) users' positive experiences, (4) users' negative emotions, and (5) attributes desired by user. CONCLUSIONS: There is little research in the field that has explored user experiences in human-computer interactions and how such experiences may relate to engagement, especially among males. Although not conclusive, the current study provides some insight into what personal attributes of middle-aged males (such as their key motives and goals for participating) and attributes of the intervention materials (such as usability, control, and interactivity) may impact on user engagement in this group. These findings will be helpful for informing the design and implementation of future health behavior interventions for males. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12611000081910; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?ACTRN=12611000081910 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6M4lBlvCA).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".