User Perception of a Smartphone App to Promote Physical Activity Through Active Transportation: Inductive Qualitative Content Analysis Within the Smart City Active Mobile Phone Intervention (SCAMPI) Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Physical inactivity is globally recognized as a major risk factor for morbidity, particularly the incidence of noncommunicable diseases. Increasing physical activity (PA) is therefore a public health priority. Engaging in active transportation (AT) is a viable approach for promoting daily PA levels. Mobile health interventions enable the promotion of AT to a larger population. The Smart City Active Mobile Phone Intervention (SCAMPI) study was a randomized controlled trial designed to evaluate the ability of a behavior change program delivered via a smartphone app to motivate participants to increase their PA by engaging in AT. OBJECTIVE: This qualitative study aims to examine the acceptance and user experience of the app promoting AT that was used in the SCAMPI trial (the TRavelVU Plus app). METHODS: A total of 17 residents of Stockholm County (13 women; age range 25-61 years) who completed the 3-month app-based behavioral change program (delivered through the TRavelVU Plus app) in the SCAMPI randomized controlled trial during 2018 agreed to participate in a semistructured telephone-based interview. These participants were well representative of the whole intervention group (n=127) in terms of baseline characteristics such as age, sex, and area of residence. The interviews were audiorecorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using an inductive qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: The content analysis revealed 2 themes and 4 subcategories. The first theme, "main motivators: monitoring and messages," highlighted that monitoring AT and being able to set weekly goals using the app were the primary motivators reported by study participants. The second theme, "acceptable but modifiable," reflects that the app was well accepted and effectively encouraged many participants to use more AT. Nevertheless, there were functions in the app that require modification. For example, while the semiautomated travel tracking feature was appreciated, participants found it time-consuming and unreliable at times. CONCLUSIONS: This study contributes novel insight into adults' experiences of using a mobile app to promote the use of AT. The results showed that the app was well accepted and that self-monitoring and goal setting were the main motivators to engage in more AT. The semiautomated tracking of AT was appreciated; however, it was also reported to be energy- and time-consuming when it failed to work. Thus, this feature should be improved going forward. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03086837; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03086837. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1186/s12889-018-5658-4.
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 | 0.011 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".