Dose–Response Effects of Patient Engagement on Health Outcomes in an mHealth Intervention: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The dose-response relationship between patient engagement and long-term intervention effects in mobile health (mHealth) interventions are understudied. Studies exploring long-term and potentially changing relationships between patient engagement and health outcomes in mHealth interventions are needed. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to examine dose-response relationships between patient engagement and 3 psychosocial outcomes in an mHealth intervention, Run4Love, using repeated measurements of outcomes at baseline and 3, 6, and 9 months. METHODS: This study is a secondary analysis using longitudinal data from the Run4Love trial, a randomized controlled trial with 300 people living with HIV and elevated depressive symptoms to examine the effects of a 3-month mHealth intervention on reducing depressive symptoms and improving quality of life (QOL). We examined the relationships between patient engagement and depressive symptoms, QOL, and perceived stress in the intervention group (N=150) using 4-time-point outcome measurements. Patient engagement was assessed using the completion rate of course assignments and frequency of items completed. Cluster analysis was used to categorize patients into high- and low-engagement groups. Generalized linear mixed effects models were conducted to investigate the dose-response relationships between patient engagement and outcomes. RESULTS: The cluster analysis identified 2 clusters that were distinctively different from each other. The first cluster comprised 72 participants with good compliance to the intervention, completing an average of 74% (53/72) of intervention items (IQR 0.22). The second cluster comprised 78 participants with low compliance to the intervention, completing an average of 15% (11/72) of intervention items (IQR 0.23). Results of the generalized linear mixed effects models showed that, compared with the low-engagement group, the high-engagement group had a significant reduction in more depressive symptoms (β=-1.93; P=.008) and perceived stress (β=-1.72; P<.001) and an improved QOL (β=2.41; P=.01) over 9 months. From baseline to 3, 6, and 9 months, the differences in depressive symptoms between the 2 engagement groups were 0.8, 1.6, 2.3, and 3.7 points, respectively, indicating widening between-group differences over time. Similarly, between-group differences in QOL and perceived stress increased over time (group differences in QOL: 0.9, 1.9, 4.7, and 5.1 points, respectively; group differences in the Perceived Stress Scale: 0.9, 1.4, 2.3, and 3.0 points, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed a positive long-term dose-response relationship between patient engagement and 3 psychosocial outcomes among people living with HIV and elevated depressive symptoms in an mHealth intervention over 9 months using 4 time-point repeat measurement data. The high- and low-engagement groups showed significant and widening differences in depressive symptoms, QOL, and perceived stress at the 3-, 6-, and 9-month follow-ups. Future mHealth interventions should improve patient engagement to achieve long-term and sustained intervention effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR-IPR-17012606; https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=21019.
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 | 0.069 | 0.102 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.017 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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.
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".