Personalization of Mobile Apps for Health Behavior Change: Protocol for a Cross-sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mobile health apps have the potential to motivate people to adopt healthier behavior, but many fail to maintain this behavior over time. However, it has been suggested that long-term adherence can be improved by personalizing the proposed interventions. Based on the literature, we created a conceptual framework for selecting appropriate functionalities according to the user's profile. OBJECTIVE: This cross-sectional study aims to investigate if the relationships linking functionalities and profiles proposed in our conceptual framework are confirmed by user preferences. METHODS: A web-based questionnaire comprising several sections was developed to determine the mobile app functionalities most likely to promote healthier behavior. First, participants completed questionnaires to define the user profile (Big Five Inventory-10, Hexad Scale, and perception of the social norm using dimensions of the Theory of Planned Behavior). Second, participants were asked to select the 5 functionalities they considered to be the most relevant to motivate healthier behavior and to evaluate them on a score ranging from 0 to 100. We will perform logistic regressions with the selected functionalities as dependent variables and with the 3 profile scales as predictors to allow us to understand the effect of the participants' scores on each of the 3 profile scales on the 5 selected functionalities. In addition, we will perform logistic ordinal regressions with the motivation score of the functionalities chosen as dependent variables and with scores of the 3 profile scales as predictors to determine whether the scores on the different profile scales predict the functionality score. RESULTS: Data collection was conducted between July and December 2021. Analysis of responses began in January 2022, with the publication of results expected by the end of 2022. CONCLUSIONS: This study will allow us to validate our conceptual model by defining the preferred functionalities according to user profiles. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/38603.
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 | 0.025 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.042 | 0.009 |
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".