MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4286603043 · doi:10.2196/preprints.41206

Mobile Health Fitness Applications: A Quantitative Analysis of Features and Barriers to Routine Use and Data Sharing Acceptability (Preprint)

2022· preprint· en· W4286603043 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Amir Razaghizad, Isabelle Malhamé, Turney McKee, Matthias G. Friedrich, Nadia Giannetti, Andrew J. Coristine, Anders Johnson, Euan A. Ashley, Steven G. Hershman, Brooke Struck, Sekoul Krastev, Dan Pilat, Abhinav Sharma

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsmHealthPreprintLogistic regressionPromotion (chess)PersonalizationPsychological interventionPsychologyApplied psychologyAffect (linguistics)Computer scienceMedicineGerontologyWorld Wide WebNursingPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND Mobile health (mHealth) fitness applications are increasingly being used for research and physical activity promotion; however, which features facilitate and impede routine engagement, a known predictor of application retention, are not well understood. OBJECTIVE To understand facilitators and barriers in the use of mobile applications relating to physical activity promotion. METHODS We distributed a pan-Canadian online questionnaire via the behavioral research platform Prolific.co to evaluate what features associated with the use and routine engagement (i.e., daily, or weekly use) of mHealth fitness applications, and attitudes about data sharing. Binary logistic regression was used to quantify the association between these endpoints and exploratory factors such as the perceived utility of various mHealth application features. RESULTS The survey received 694 responses. Most people were women (62%), the median age was 28 (range: 18–78), and most people reported current use of an mHealth fitness application (48%). The perceived importance of personal health (OR 2.40; 95%·CI 1.34–4.50) was the factor most associated with the current use of an mHealth fitness application. The feature most associated with routine engagement was the ability to track progress toward a goal (OR 5.10, 95%·CI 2.73–9.61) while the most significant barrier was the absence of goal customization features (OR 0.44, 95%·CI 0.25–0.81). The acceptance of sharing health data for research was high (56%) and privacy concerns did not significantly affect routine engagement (OR 0.81, 95%·CI 0.40–1.77). Results were consistent across race and gender. CONCLUSIONS Our results demonstrate that mHealth applications have the potential to be scaled across populations. Optimizing applications to improve self-monitoring and personalization could increase routine engagement and thus user retention and intervention effectiveness.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.049
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 score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.163

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.049
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.505
Teacher spread0.368 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMobile Health and mHealth Applications→French-language works237,207→