MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376871139 · doi:10.2196/44792

Using Human-Centered Design and Cocreation to Create the Live 5-2-1-0 Mobile App to Promote Healthy Behaviors in Children: App Design and Development

2023· article· en· W4376871139 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Kiana W Yau, Tricia S. Tang, Matthias Görges, Susan Pinkney, Shazhan Amed

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Pediatrics and Parenting · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsThematic analysisFocus groupUsabilitySession (web analytics)Mobile appsPsychologyQualitative researchChildhood obesityParticipatory action researchQualitative propertyGeneral partnershipMedicineMedical educationApplied psychologyComputer scienceObesityWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of obesity among Canadian children is rising, partly because of increasingly obesogenic environments that limit opportunities for physical activity and healthy nutrition. Live 5-2-1-0 is a community-based multisectoral childhood obesity prevention initiative that engages stakeholders to promote and support the message of consuming ≥5 servings of vegetables and fruits, having <2 hours of recreational screen time, participating in ≥1 hour of active play, and consuming 0 sugary drinks every day. A Live 5-2-1-0 Toolkit for health care providers (HCPs) was previously developed and piloted in 2 pediatric clinics at British Columbia Children's Hospital. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to co-create, in partnership with children, parents, and HCPs, a Live 5-2-1-0 mobile app that supports healthy behavior change and could be used as part of the Live 5-2-1-0 Toolkit for HCPs. METHODS: Three focus groups (FGs) were conducted using human-centered design and participatory approaches. In FG 1, children (separately) and parents and HCPs (together) participated in sessions on app conceptualization and design. Researchers and app developers analyzed and interpreted qualitative data from FG 1 in an ideation session, and key themes were subsequently presented separately to parents, children, and HCPs in FG-2 (co-creation) sessions to identify desired app features. Parents and children tested a prototype in FG 3, provided feedback on usability and content, and completed questionnaires. Thematic analysis and descriptive statistics were used for the qualitative and quantitative data, respectively. RESULTS: In total, 14 children (mean age 10.2, SD 1.3 years; 5/14, 36% male; 5/14, 36% White), 12 parents (9/12, 75% aged 40-49 years; 2/12, 17% male; 7/12, 58% White), and 18 HCPs participated; most parents and children (20/26, 77%) participated in ≥2 FGs. Parents wanted an app that empowered children to adopt healthy behaviors using internal motivation and accountability, whereas children described challenge-oriented goals and family-based activities as motivating. Parents and children identified gamification, goal setting, daily steps, family-based rewards, and daily notifications as desired features; HCPs wanted baseline behavior assessments and to track users' behavior change progress. Following prototype testing, parents and children reported ease in completing tasks, with a median score of 7 (IQR 6-7) on a 7-point Likert scale (1=very difficult; 7=very easy). Children liked most suggested rewards (28/37, 76%) and found 79% (76/96) of suggested daily challenges (healthy behavior activities that users complete to achieve their goal) realistic to achieve. Participant suggestions included strategies to maintain users' interest and content that further motivates healthy behavior change. CONCLUSIONS: Co-creating a mobile health app with children, parents, and HCPs was feasible. Stakeholders desired an app that facilitated shared decision-making with children as active agents in behavior change. Future research will involve clinical implementation and assessment of the usability and effectiveness of the Live 5-2-1-0 app.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2023
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Pediatrics and ParentingSame topicMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207