Effectiveness of Computer Tailoring Versus Peer Support Web-Based Interventions in Promoting Physical Activity Among Insufficiently Active Canadian Adults With Type 2 Diabetes: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Type 2 diabetes is a major challenge for Canadian public health authorities, and regular physical activity is a key factor in the management of this disease. Given that less than half of people with type 2 diabetes in Canada are sufficiently active to meet the Canadian Diabetes Association's guidelines, effective programs targeting the adoption of regular physical activity are in demand for this population. Many researchers have argued that Web-based interventions targeting physical activity are a promising avenue for insufficiently active populations; however, it remains unclear if this type of intervention is effective among people with type 2 diabetes. OBJECTIVE: This research project aims to evaluate the effectiveness of two Web-based interventions targeting the adoption of regular aerobic physical activity among insufficiently active adult Canadian Francophones with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: A 3-arm, parallel randomized controlled trial with 2 experimental groups and 1 control group was conducted in the province of Quebec, Canada. A total of 234 participants were randomized at a 1:1:1 ratio to receive an 8-week, fully automated, computer-tailored, Web-based intervention (experimental group 1); an 8-week peer support (ie, Facebook group) Web-based intervention (experimental group 2); or no intervention (control group) during the study period. RESULTS: The primary outcome of this study is self-reported physical activity level (total min/week of moderate-intensity aerobic physical activity). Secondary outcomes are attitude, social influence, self-efficacy, type of motivation, and intention. All outcomes are assessed at baseline and 3 and 9 months after baseline with a self-reported questionnaire filled directly on the study websites. CONCLUSIONS: By evaluating and comparing the effectiveness of 2 Web-based interventions characterized by different behavior change perspectives, findings of this study will contribute to advances in the field of physical activity promotion in adult populations with type 2 diabetes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN): ISRCTN15747108; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN15747108 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6eJTi0m3r).
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 | 0.032 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.054 | 0.007 |
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".