Feasibility of Fit24, a Digital Diabetes Prevention Program for Hispanic Adolescents: Qualitative Evaluation Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Digital health interventions are promising for reaching and engaging high-risk youth in disease prevention opportunities; however, few digital prevention interventions have been developed for Hispanic youth, limiting our knowledge of these strategies among this population. OBJECTIVE: This study qualitatively assessed the feasibility and acceptability of Fit24, a 12-week goal-setting intervention that uses a Fitbit watch (Fitbit Inc) and theoretically grounded SMS text messages to promote physical activity and sleep among Hispanic adolescents (aged between 14 and 16 years) with obesity. METHODS: After completing the intervention, a subsample of youth (N=15) participated in an in-depth interview. We categorized the themes into dimensions based on participant perspectives using the Practical, Robust Implementation, and Sustainability Model (PRISM) framework. RESULTS: Participants shared positive perceptions of wearing the Fitbit and receiving SMS text messages. Youth were highly engaged in monitoring their behaviors and perceived increased activity and sleep. Almost all youth organically received social support from a peer or family member and suggested the use of a group chat or team challenge for integrating peers into future interventions. However, most youth also expressed the need to take personal responsibility for the change in their behavior. Barriers that impacted the feasibility of the study included the skin-irritating material on the Fitbit watch band and environmental barriers (eg, lack of resources and school schedules), that limited participation in activity suggestions. Additionally, sync issues with the Fitbit limited the transmission of data, leading to inaccurate feedback. CONCLUSIONS: Fit24 is a promising approach for engaging Hispanic youth in a diabetes prevention program. Strategies are needed to address technical issues with the Fitbit and environmental issues such as message timing. While integrating peer social support may be desired by some, peer support strategies should be mindful of youth's desire to foster personal motivation for behavior change. Findings from this study will inform future diabetes prevention trials of Fit24 and other digital health interventions for high-risk pediatric populations.
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 | 0.028 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".