The Feasibility of Financial Incentives to Increase Exercise Among Canadian Cardiac Rehabilitation Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief PURPOSE: To examine the feasibility of conducting a randomized controlled trial investigating the effectiveness of financial incentives for exercise self-monitoring in cardiac rehabilitation (CR). METHODS: A 12-week, 2 parallel-arm, single-blind feasibility study design was employed. A volunteer sample of CR program graduates was randomly assigned to an exercise self-monitoring intervention only (control; n = 14; mean age ± SD, 62.7 ± 14.6 years), or an exercise self-monitoring plus incentives approach (incentive; n = 13; mean age ± SD, 63.6 ± 11.8 years). Control group participants received a “home-based” exercise self-monitoring program following CR program completion (exercise diaries could be submitted online or by mail). Incentive group participants received the “home-based” program, plus voucher-based incentives for exercise diary submissions ($2 per day). A range of feasibility outcomes is presented, including recruitment and retention rates, and intervention acceptability. Data for the proposed primary outcome of a definitive trial, aerobic fitness, are also reported. RESULTS: Seventy-four CR graduates were potentially eligible to participate, 27 were enrolled (36.5% recruitment rate; twice the expected rate), and 5 were lost to followup (80% retention). Intervention acceptability was high with three-quarters of participants indicating that they would likely sign up for an incentive program at baseline. While group differences in exercise self-monitoring (the incentive “target”) were not observed, modest but nonsignificant changes in aerobic fitness were noted with fitness increasing by 0.23 mL·kg−1·min−1 among incentive participants and decreasing by 0.68 mL·kg−1·min−1 among controls. CONCLUSION: This preliminary study demonstrates the feasibility of studying incentives in a CR context, and the potential for incentives to be readily accepted in the broader context of the Canadian health care system. This feasibility study sets the stage for a definitive randomized trial investigating the effectiveness of financial incentives for exercise in cardiac rehabilitation. To refine the protocol and optimize the definitive trial, several methodological issues are addressed. This study underscores the potential for incentives to be accepted in the cardiac rehabilitation context.
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 | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".