MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2901457770 · doi:10.2196/11312

Mobile-Based Interventions for Dietary Behavior Change and Health Outcomes: Scoping Review

2018· article· en· W2901457770 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Atreyi Kankanhalli, Jieun Shin, Hyelim Oh

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionPsycINFOmHealthBehavior change methodsBehavior changeDigital healthMEDLINEIntervention (counseling)MedicineApplied psychologyPsychologyHealth careNursingSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mobile apps are being widely used for delivering health interventions, with their ubiquitous access and sensing capabilities. One such use is the delivery of interventions for healthy eating behavior. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive view of the literature on the use of mobile interventions for eating behavior change. We synthesized the studies with such interventions and mapped out their input methods, interventions, and outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a scoping literature search in PubMed/MEDLINE, Association for Computing Machinery Digital Library, and PsycINFO databases to identify relevant papers published between January 2013 and April 2018. We also hand-searched relevant themes of journals in the Journal of Medical Internet Research and registered protocols. Studies were included if they provided and assessed mobile-based interventions for dietary behavior changes and/or health outcomes. RESULTS: The search resulted in 30 studies that we classified by 3 main aspects: input methods, mobile-based interventions, and dietary behavior changes and health outcomes. First, regarding input methods, 5 studies allowed photo/voice/video inputs of diet information, whereas text input methods were used in the remaining studies. Other than diet information, the content of the input data in the mobile apps included user's demographics, medication, health behaviors, and goals. Second, we identified 6 categories of intervention contents, that is, self-monitoring, feedback, gamification, goal reviews, social support, and educational information. Although all 30 studies included self-monitoring as a key component of their intervention, personalized feedback was a component in 18 studies, gamification was used in 10 studies, goal reviews in 5 studies, social support in 3 studies, and educational information in 2 studies. Finally, we found that 13 studies directly examined the effects of interventions on health outcomes and 12 studies examined the effects on dietary behavior changes, whereas only 5 studies observed the effects both on dietary behavior changes and health outcomes. Regarding the type of studies, although two-thirds of the included studies conducted diverse forms of randomized control trials, the other 10 studies used field studies, surveys, protocols, qualitative interviews, propensity score matching method, and test and reference method. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review identified and classified studies on mobile-based interventions for dietary behavior change as per the input methods, nature of intervention, and outcomes examined. Our findings indicated that dietary behavior changes, although playing a mediating role in improving health outcomes, have not been adequately examined in the literature. Dietary behavior change as a mechanism for the relationship between mobile-based intervention and health outcomes needs to be further investigated. Our review provides guidance for future research in this promising mobile health area.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.085
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.085
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.007
Bibliometrics0.0200.016
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.438
GPT teacher head0.598
Teacher spread0.161 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations36
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealth→Same topicMobile Health and mHealth Applications→French-language works237,207→