Barriers and Enablers to the Adoption of a Healthier Diet Using an App: Qualitative Interview Study With Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Adopting a healthy diet is one of the cornerstones of type 2 diabetes (T2D) management. Apps are increasingly used in diabetes self-management, but most studies to date have focused on assessing their impact in terms of weight loss or glycemic control, with limited evidence on the behavioral factors that influence app use to change dietary habits. OBJECTIVE: The main objectives of this study were to assess the enablers and barriers to adopting a healthier diet using the Gro Health app in 2 patient groups with T2D (patients with recently diagnosed and long-standing T2D) and to identify behavior change techniques (BCTs) to enhance enablers and overcome barriers. METHODS: Two semistructured qualitative interview studies were conducted; the first study took place between June and July 2021, with a sample of 8 patients with recently diagnosed (<12 mo) T2D, whereas the second study was conducted between May and June 2022 and included 15 patients with long-standing (>18 mo) T2D. In both studies, topic guides were informed by the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, and Behavior model and the Theoretical Domains Framework. Transcripts were analyzed using a combined deductive framework and inductive thematic analysis approach. The Behavior Change Wheel framework was applied to identify appropriate BCTs that could be used in future iterations of apps for patients with diabetes. Themes were compared between the patient groups. RESULTS: This study identified similarities and differences between patient groups in terms of enablers and barriers to adopting a healthier diet using the app. The main enablers for recently diagnosed patients included the acquired knowledge about T2D diets and skills to implement these, whereas the main barriers were the difficulty in deciding which app features to use and limited cooking skills. By contrast, for patients with long-standing T2D, the main enablers included knowledge validation provided by the app, along with app elements to help self-regulate food intake; the main barriers were the limited interest paid to the content provided or limited skills engaging with apps in general. Both groups reported more enablers than barriers to performing the target behavior when using the app. Consequently, BCTs were selected to address key barriers in both groups, such as simplifying the information hierarchy in the app interface, including tutorials demonstrating how to use the app features, and redesigning the landing page of the app to guide users toward these tutorials. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with recently diagnosed and long-standing T2D encountered similar enablers but slightly different barriers when using an app to adopting a healthier diet. Consequently, the development of app-based approaches to adopt a healthier diet should account for these similarities and differences within patient segments to reduce barriers to performing the target behavior.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".