User Retention and Engagement in the Digital-Based Diabetes Education and Self-Management for Ongoing and Newly Diagnosed (myDESMOND) Program: Descriptive Longitudinal Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Digital health interventions have the potential to improve the physical and psychosocial health of people living with type 2 diabetes. However, research investigating the long-term (≥1 year) retention and engagement of users within these programs is limited. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate long-term user retention and engagement in the digital-based Diabetes Education and Self-Management for Ongoing and Newly Diagnosed (myDESMOND) program, using real-world data. METHODS: Anonymized data from all myDESMOND users who registered with the program on or before November 16, 2020, were included in the analyses. User retention was defined as the period between the day a user registered with the myDESMOND program and their last day of access. The primary engagement outcome was defined as the total number of log-ins to the program per user. The associations between retention, engagement, and sociodemographic factors (age, sex, and ethnicity) were tested using Cox regression models and Wilcoxon rank sum tests. RESULTS: A total of 9522 myDESMOND users were included in this analysis. Of the 9522 users, 5360 (56.29%) remained on the program for at least a month, whereas 1676 (17.6%) remained on the program for at least 1 year. Retention was significantly higher among older users; the adjusted hazard ratio (representing the risk of users leaving the program within the first year) among users aged ≥50 years, compared with those aged <50 years, was 0.79 (95% CI 0.75-0.84; P<.001). The median number of myDESMOND log-ins per user was 8 (IQR 4-8); however, this was significantly lower among users aged <50 years (P<.001). Engagement metrics also differed according to sociodemographic characteristics; the estimated time spent per log-in was 5.35 (IQR 2.22-11.80) minutes among all users; however, this was significantly higher among female users (P<.001), users aged ≥50 years (P<.001), and users of White ethnicity (P=.02). CONCLUSIONS: Although retention and engagement of users within myDESMOND were found to be high, these findings highlight the need for age- and culture-specific implementation strategies and content adaptations to improve retention and engagement among all users of self-management programs.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".