MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2782297289 · doi:10.2196/mhealth.8719

Importance of Active Participation in Obesity Management Through Mobile Health Care Programs: Substudy of a Randomized Controlled Trial

2018· article· en· W2782297289 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bumjo Oh, Ga-Hye Yi, Min Kyu Han, Jong S. Kim, Chang Hee Lee, Belong Cho, Hee‐Cheol Kang

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverweightWeight lossMedicineRandomized controlled trialPhysical therapyObesitymHealthWeight managementAnthropometryMobile phoneIntervention (counseling)GerontologyFamily medicinePsychological interventionNursingSurgeryInternal medicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Due to the prevalence of the westernized dietary pattern and lack of physical activity, the numbers of overweight or obese individuals are increasing, resulting in a growing health burden because of various related diseases. A lifestyle modification approach has additional advantages compared with pharmacological therapies or bariatric surgery. In our randomized controlled trial conducted in 2015, we successfully used a ubiquitous health care (SmartCare) service for patients with metabolic syndrome to achieve a significant weight loss effect. Various useful apps have been developed for the SmartCare Service, which involves using a mobile phone to manage chronic diseases, minimizing time and space restrictions. Many studies have demonstrated weight loss effects using a SmartCare service, but limited data are available regarding the effect of active participation in relation to weight loss. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the weight loss effect achieved after using the SmartCare service in terms of adherence and participation. We divided the intervention group of the previous study according to participation level, and analyzed whether there was a significant difference in the outcome. METHODS: We classified participants into 3 groups according to their adherence. Within the intervention group using the SmartCare service, the active group comprised those transmitting anthropometric measurement data using a mobile phone 3 or more times per week or who had a health consultation 5 or more times during a 24-week period. The passive group comprised those who did not adhere to these levels of engagement. The control group comprised those who did not use the SmartCare service. We compared changes in body weight, body mass index (BMI), body fat percentage, waist circumference, and lipid profile among the 3 groups. RESULTS: We identified 422 participants and analyzed 405, excluding 17 who were missing necessary data for analysis. The active group consisted of 116 participants, compared with 80 in the passive group and 209 in the control group (without SmartCare service). There was a statistically significant difference in improvements to body weight, BMI, body fat percentage, and waist circumference among active participants compared with less active participants and the control group (P<.05). However, the lipid profile changes did not differ significantly between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The level of participation may be related to improved weight-related outcomes, which may improve health outcomes. To maximize the effectiveness of the SmartCare service, encouraging active participation is important. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01344811; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01344811 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6alT2MmIB).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.007
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.424 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations24
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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