The Adaptive GameSquad Xbox-Based Physical Activity and Health Coaching Intervention for Youth With Neurodevelopmental and Psychiatric Diagnoses: Pilot Feasibility Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The prevalence of neurodevelopmental and psychiatric diagnoses (NPDs) in youth is increasing, and unhealthy physical activity (PA), diet, screen time, and sleep habits contribute to the chronic disease disparities and behavioral challenges this population experiences. OBJECTIVE: This pilot study aims to adapt a proven exergaming and telehealth PA coaching intervention for typically developing youth with overweight or obesity; expand it to address diet, screen, and sleep behaviors; and then test its feasibility and acceptability, including PA engagement, among youth with NPDs. METHODS: Participants (N=23; mean age 15.1 years, SD 1.5; 17 males, 9 people of color) recruited in person from clinic and special education settings were randomized to the Adaptive GameSquad (AGS) intervention or wait-list control. The 10-week adapted intervention included 3 exergaming sessions per week and 6 real-time telehealth coaching sessions. The primary outcomes included feasibility (adherence to planned sessions), engagement (uptake and acceptability as reported on process questionnaires), and PA level (combined light, moderate, and vigorous as measured by accelerometer). Descriptive statistics summarized feasibility and engagement data, whereas paired, two-tailed t tests assessed group differences in pre-post PA. RESULTS: Of the 6 coaching sessions, AGS participants (n=11; mean age 15.3 years, SD 1.2; 7 males, 4 people of color) completed an average of 5 (83%), averaging 81.2 minutes per week of exergaming. Of 9 participants who completed the exit questionnaire, 6 (67%) reported intention to continue, and 8 (89%) reported feeling that the coaching sessions were helpful. PA and sleep appeared to increase during the course of the intervention over baseline, video game use appeared to decrease, and pre-post intervention PA per day significantly decreased for the control (-58.8 min; P=.04) but not for the intervention group (-5.3 min; P=.77), despite potential seasonality effects. However, beta testers and some intervention participants indicated a need for reduced complexity of technology and more choice in exergames. CONCLUSIONS: AGS shows promise in delivering a health behavior intervention remotely to youth with NPDs, but a full-scale efficacy trial with a larger sample size is needed to confirm this finding. On the basis of feedback from beta testers and intervention participants, the next steps should include reduced technology burden and increased exergame choice before efficacy testing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03665415; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03665415.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".