MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386145168 · doi:10.2196/44993

Unveiling Consumer Preferences and Intentions for Cocreated Features of a Combined Diet and Physical Activity App: Cross-Sectional Study in 4 European Countries

2023· article· en· W4386145168 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bahram Mahmoodi Kahriz, Sarah Snuggs, Anumeha Sah, Sophie Clot, Daniel J. Lamport, Joseph Forrest, Agnès Helme-Guizon, Marie-Claire Wilhelm, Cindy Caldara, Camille Valentine Anin, Julia Vogt

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Human Factors · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsRecipePhysical activityTracking (education)PsychologyMobile appsAdvertisingBusinessComputer scienceMedicineFood scienceWorld Wide WebBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Numerous mobile health apps are marketed globally, and these have specific features including physical activity tracking, motivational feedback, and recipe provision. It is important to understand which features individuals prefer and whether these preferences differ between consumer groups. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we aimed to identify consumers' most preferred features and rewards for a mobile app that targets healthy eating and physical activity and to reduce the number of individual mobile health app features to a smaller number of key categories as perceived by consumers. In addition, we investigated the impact of differences in consumers' BMI and self-efficacy on their intention to use and willingness to pay for such an app. Finally, we identified the characteristics of different target groups of consumers and their responses toward app features via cluster analysis. METHODS: A total of 212 participants from France, Italy, the United Kingdom, and Germany were recruited via the web to answer questions about app features, motivation, self-efficacy, demographics, and geographic factors. It is important to note that our study included an evenly distributed sample of people in the age range of 23 to 50 years (23-35 and 35-50 years). The app features in question were generated from a 14-day cocreation session by a group of consumers from the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. RESULTS: "Home work out suggestions," "exercise tips," and "progress charts" were the most preferred app features, whereas "gift vouchers" and "shopping discounts" were the most preferred rewards. "Connections with other communication apps" was the least preferred feature, and "charitable giving" was the least preferred reward. Importantly, consumers' positive attitude toward the "social support and connectedness and mindfulness" app feature predicted willingness to pay for such an app (β=.229; P=.004). Differences in consumers' health status, motivational factors, and basic demographics moderated these results and consumers' intention to use and willingness to pay for such an app. Notably, younger and more motivated consumers with more experience and knowledge about health apps indicated more positive attitudes and intentions to use and willingness to pay for this type of app. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicated that consumers tend to prefer app features that are activity based and demonstrate progress. It also suggested a potential role for monetary rewards in promoting healthy lifestyle behaviors. Moreover, the results highlighted the role of consumers' health status, motivational factors, and socioeconomic status in predicting their app use. These results provide up-to-date, practical, and pragmatic information for the future design and operation of mobile health apps.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.114
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.365 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Human FactorsSame topicMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207