MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2304558724 · doi:10.2196/mhealth.4730

Uptake of a Consumer-Focused mHealth Application for the Assessment and Prevention of Heart Disease: The <30 Days Study

2016· article· en· W2304558724 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Shivani Goyal, Plinio Pelegrini Morita, Peter Picton, Emily Seto, Ahmad Zbib, Joseph A Cafazzo

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsHeart and Stroke FoundationUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsmHealthIncentiveDiseaseMobile appsMedicineUploadGerontologyBehavior changeInternet privacyPsychologyComputer sciencePsychological interventionNursingInternal medicineWorld Wide WebPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Lifestyle behavior modification can reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease, one of the leading causes of death worldwide, by up to 80%. We hypothesized that a dynamic risk assessment and behavior change tool delivered as a mobile app, hosted by a reputable nonprofit organization, would promote uptake among community members. We also predicted that the uptake would be influenced by incentives offered for downloading the mobile app. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of our study was to evaluate the engagement levels of participants using the novel risk management app. The secondary aim was to assess the effect of incentives on the overall uptake and usage behaviors. METHODS: We publicly launched the app through the iTunes App Store and collected usage data over 5 months. Aggregate information included population-level data on download rates, use, risk factors, and user demographics. We used descriptive statistics to identify usage patterns, t tests, and analysis of variance to compare group means. Correlation and regression analyses determined the relationship between usage and demographic variables. RESULTS: We captured detailed mobile usage data from 69,952 users over a 5-month period, of whom 23,727 (33.92%) were registered during a 1-month AIR MILES promotion. Of those who completed the risk assessment, 73.92% (42,380/57,330) were female, and 59.38% (34,042/57,330) were <30 years old. While the older demographic had significantly lower uptake than the younger demographic, with only 8.97% of users aged ≥51 years old downloading the app, the older demographic completed more challenges than their younger counterparts (F8, 52,422 = 55.10, P<.001). In terms of engagement levels, 84.94% (44,537/52,431) of users completed 1-14 challenges over a 30-day period, and 10.03% (5,259/52,431) of users completed >22 challenges. On average, users in the incentives group completed slightly more challenges during the first 30 days of the intervention (mean 7.9, SD 0.13) than those in the nonincentives group (mean 6.1, SD 0.06, t28870=-12.293, P<.001, d=0.12, 95% CI -2.02 to -1.47). The regression analysis suggested that sex, age group, ethnicity, having 5 of the risk factors (all but alcohol), incentives, and the number of family histories were predictors of the number of challenges completed by a user (F14, 56,538 = 86.644, P<.001, adjusted R(2) = .021). CONCLUSION: While the younger population downloaded the app the most, the older population demonstrated greater sustained engagement. Behavior change apps have the potential to reach a targeted population previously thought to be uninterested in or unable to use mobile apps. The development of such apps should assume that older adults will in fact engage if the behavior change elements are suitably designed, integrated into daily routines, and tailored. Incentives may be the stepping-stone that is needed to guide the general population toward preventative tools and promote sustained behavior change.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.603
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.096
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.395 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations51
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207