The Physical Activity Tracker Testing in Youth (P.A.T.T.Y) Study: Content Analysis and Children’s Perceptions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Activity trackers are widely used by adults and several models are now marketed for children. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to (1) perform a content analysis of behavioral change techniques (BCTs) used by three commercially available youth-oriented activity trackers and (2) obtain feedback describing children's perception of these devices and the associated websites. METHODS: A content analysis recorded the presence of 36 possible BCTs for the MovBand (MB), Sqord (SQ), and Zamzee (ZZ) activity trackers. In addition, 16 participants (mean age 8.6 years [SD 1.6]; 50% female [8/16]) received all three trackers and were oriented to the devices and websites. Participants were instructed to wear the trackers on 4 consecutive days and spend ≥10 min/day on each website. A cognitive interview and survey were administered when the participant returned the devices. Qualitative data analysis was used to analyze the content of the cognitive interviews. Chi-square analyses were used to determine differences in behavioral monitoring and social interaction features between websites. RESULTS: The MB, SQ, and ZZ devices or websites included 8, 15, and 14 of the possible 36 BCTs, respectively. All of the websites had a behavioral monitoring feature (charts for tracking activity), but the percentage of participants indicating that they "liked" those features varied by website (MB: 8/16, 50%; SQ: 6/16, 38%; ZZ: 11/16, 69%). Two websites (SQ and ZZ) included an "avatar" that the user could create to represent themselves on the website. Participants reported that they "liked" creating and changing their avatar (SQ: 12/16, 75%, ZZ: 15/16, 94%), which was supported by the qualitative analyses of the cognitive interviews. Most participants (75%) indicated that they would want to wear the devices more if their friends were wearing a tracker. No significant differences were observed between SQ and ZZ devices in regards to liking or use of social support interaction features (P=.21 to .37). CONCLUSIONS: The websites contained several BCTs consistent with previously identified strategies. Children "liked" the social aspects of the websites more than the activity tracking features. Developers of commercial activity trackers for youth may benefit from considering a theoretical perspective during the website design process.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".