MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4243678106 · doi:10.2196/preprints.25055

Engagement With Web-Based Fitness Videos on YouTube and Instagram During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Longitudinal Study (Preprint)

2020· preprint· en· W4243678106 on OpenAlexaff
Wuyou Sui, Jonathan Rush, Ryan E. Rhodes

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopularityCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Internet privacyPandemicWeb applicationPreprintUploadWorld Wide WebComputer sciencePsychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND The COVID-19 pandemic has drastically changed the physical activity (PA) landscape through the closures of gymnasiums, schools, and many outdoor spaces. Physical distancing guidelines have also reduced opportunity for PA. The popularity of free web-based home fitness videos on video hosting platforms (eg, YouTube and Instagram) has spiked during the pandemic. Many web-based fitness videos offer a convenient, accessible, and cost-effective means of engaging in PA through regularly posted videos or discrete programs. Notably, traditional PA programs often suffer from poor adherence and high dropout rates, despite many advantages over web-based workout programs (eg, equipment, feedback, and in-person engagement). Thus, notwithstanding clear advantages of these web-based fitness videos, their ability to maintain long-term engagement and adherence is unknown. OBJECTIVE We explored patterns of engagement (ie, views, likes, and comments) for channels posting daily or program-based web-based fitness videos since the declaration of COVID-19 as a pandemic, over 4 months. Our secondary objective was to examine potential moderators of engagement metrics. METHODS An environmental scan was used to identify eligible channels. Eligible channels were (1) freely available on YouTube or Instagram and (2) posted daily or weekday series workouts or offered quarantine-specific workout programs. Searches for eligible channels were conducted on June 1 and 4, 2020. Engagement metrics of views, likes, and comments were then collected from channels’ videos posted between March 11 and June 26 or 30, 2020, inclusive, on June 26 or July 8, 2020. A series of multilevel modeling analyses were conducted to examine longitudinal changes in each of the 3 outcome variables. RESULTS Ten channels were deemed eligible and included in analyses; 6 posted regularly, while the other 4 posted discrete workout programs. Multilevel models revealed that both views and likes significantly decreased across days. Visually, channels display the sharpest drop in engagement within the first week. Linear change estimate indicates that the number of views initially declined by 24,700 per day (95% CI –44,400 to –11,300, P=.01) on average across all the channels. Channels with more subscribers declined in their views, likes, and comments at a significantly higher rate than those with fewer subscribers (P≤.04). The day of the week a video is posted, “virality,” and content of a video appear to influence engagement. Integrating behavior change techniques and posting new and varied videos often may help garner further engagement with these videos. Future research should examine common elements of videos, which drive engagement. CONCLUSIONS Despite raw engagement metrics, each channel demonstrated peak engagement with the initial video followed by decreased engagement with subsequent videos. As many countries maintain restrictions on traditional PA facilities owing to the COVID-19 pandemic, determining methods to improve engagement and adherence with web-based fitness videos becomes increasingly important.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

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 head0.176
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPhysical Activity and Health→French-language works237,207→