MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224280202 · doi:10.2196/33886

Message Frame–Tailoring in Digital Health Communication: Intervention Redesign and Usability Testing

2022· article· en· W4224280202 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Inge S. van Strien‐Knippenberg, Maria B. Altendorf, Ciska Hoving, Julia C.M. van Weert, Eline A. Smit

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral Health and Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKWF Kankerbestrijding
KeywordsUsabilityFraming (construction)Psychological interventionHealth communicationComputer scienceAutonomyFrame analysisSmoking cessationHuman–computer interactionPsychologyCognitive reframingMedicineSocial psychologyNursingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Message frame-tailoring based on the need for autonomy is a promising strategy to improve the effectiveness of digital health communication interventions. An example of a digital health communication intervention is Personal Advice in Stopping smoking (PAS), a web-based content-tailored smoking cessation program. PAS was effective in improving cessation success rates, but its effect sizes were small and disappeared after 6 months. Therefore, investigating whether message frame-tailoring based on the individual's need for autonomy might improve effect rates is worthwhile. However, to our knowledge, this has not been studied previously. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether adding message frame-tailoring based on the need for autonomy increases the effectiveness of content-tailored interventions, the PAS program was redesigned to incorporate message frame-tailoring also. This paper described the process of redesigning the PAS program to include message frame-tailoring, providing smokers with autonomy-supportive or controlling message frames-depending on their individual need for autonomy. Therefore, we aimed to extend framing theory, tailoring theory, and self-determination theory. METHODS: Extension of the framing theory, tailoring theory, and self-determination theory by redesigning the PAS program to include message frame-tailoring was conducted in close collaboration with scientific and nonscientific smoking cessation experts (n=10), smokers (n=816), and communication science students (n=19). Various methods were used to redesign the PAS program to include message frame-tailoring with optimal usability: usability testing, think-aloud methodology, heuristic evaluations, and a web-based experiment. RESULTS: The most autonomy-supportive and controlling message frames were identified, the cutoff point for the need for autonomy to distinguish between people with high and those with low need for autonomy was determined, and the usability was optimized. CONCLUSIONS: This resulted in a redesigned digital health communication intervention that included message frame-tailoring and had optimal usability. A detailed description of the redesigning process of the PAS program is provided. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register NL6512 (NRT6700); https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/6512.

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)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.068
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.173

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.068
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.289
GPT teacher head0.541
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicBehavioral Health and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207