Adding Mobile Elements to Online Physical Activity Interventions for Adults Aged Over 50 Years: Prototype Development Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Only a minority of adults aged over 50 years meet physical activity (PA) guidelines of the World Health Organization (WHO). eHealth interventions are proven effective tools to help this population increase its PA levels in the short term, among which the Active Plus and I Move interventions have been developed by our own research group. To achieve long-term effects, increase intervention use, and decrease dropout rates, 3 emergent but different mobile elements (an activity tracker, an ecological momentary intervention [EMI] program, and a chatbot) were added separately to Active Plus and I Move. In this study, the prototype development and pilot-testing of these interventions is described. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to enhance 2 existing PA-stimulating computer-based interventions with 3 mobile elements (an activity tracker, an EMI program, or a chatbot) and test the prototypes on usability and appreciation within a target population of adults aged over 50 years. METHODS: A systematic design protocol consisting of development, evaluation, and adaptation procedures was followed with involvement of the target population. Literature searches separated per mobile element and interviews with the target population (N=11) led to 6 prototypes: Active Plus or I Move including (1) an activity tracker, (2) EMI, or (3) a chatbot. These prototypes were tested on usability and appreciation during pilot tests (N=47) and subsequently fine-tuned based on the results. RESULTS: The literature searches and interviews provided important recommendations on the preferences of the target population, which enabled us to develop prototypes. The subsequent pilot tests showed that the mobile elements scored moderate to good on usability, with average System Usability Scale (SUS) scores of 52.2-82.2, and moderate to good on enjoyment and satisfaction, with average scores ranging from 5.1 to 8.1 on a scale of 1-10. The activity tracker received the best scores, followed by EMI, followed by the chatbot. Based on the findings, the activity tracker interventions were fine-tuned and technical difficulties regarding EMI and the chatbot were solved, which is expected to further improve usability and appreciation. CONCLUSIONS: During this study, 6 prototypes of online PA interventions with added mobile elements were developed and tested for usability and appreciation. Although all prototypes scored moderate to high on usability, enjoyment, and satisfaction, it can be concluded that the integration of an activity tracker with a computer-based PA intervention is the most promising option among the 3 mobile elements tested during this study. The prototype development steps of the systematic design protocol followed can be considered useful and successful for the purposes of this study. The interventions can now be evaluated on a larger scale through a randomized controlled trial. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/31677.
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 | 0.013 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".