Physical Activity, Body Composition, and Fitness Variables in Adolescents After Periods of Mandatory, Promoted or Nonmandatory, Nonpromoted Use of Step Tracker Mobile Apps: Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is not known whether an intervention made mandatory as a physical education (PE) class assignment and aimed at promoting physical activity (PA) in adolescents can create a healthy walking habit, which would allow further improvements to be achieved after the mandatory and promoted intervention has been completed. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to (1) investigate whether, after a period of using a step tracker mobile app made mandatory and promoted as a PE class assignment, adolescents continue to use it when its use is no longer mandatory and promoted; (2) determine whether there are changes in the PA level, body composition, and fitness of adolescents when the use of the app is mandatory and promoted and when it is neither mandatory nor promoted; and (3) analyze whether the covariates maturity status, gender, and specific app used can have an influence. METHODS: A total of 357 students in compulsory secondary education (age: mean 13.92, SD 1.91 y) participated in the study. A randomized controlled trial was conducted consisting of 2 consecutive 10-week interventions. Participants' PA level, body composition, and fitness were measured at baseline (T1), after 10 weeks of mandatory and promoted app use (T2), and after 10 weeks of nonmandatory and nonpromoted app use (T3). Each participant in the experimental group (EG) used 1 of 4 selected step tracker mobile apps after school hours. RESULTS: The results showed that when the use of the apps was neither mandatory nor promoted as a PE class assignment, only a few adolescents (18/216, 8.3%) continued the walking practice. After the mandatory and promoted intervention period (T1 vs T2), a decrease in the sum of 3 skinfolds (mean difference [MD] 1.679; P=.02) as well as improvements in the PA level (MD -0.170; P<.001), maximal oxygen uptake (MD -1.006; P<.001), countermovement jump test (MD -1.337; P=.04), curl-up test (MD -3.791; P<.001), and push-up test (MD -1.920; P<.001) in the EG were recorded. However, the changes between T1 and T2 were significantly greater in the EG than in the control group only in the PA level and curl-up test. Thus, when comparing the measurements taken between T1 and T3, no significant changes in body composition (P=.07) or fitness (P=.84) were observed between the EG and the control group. The covariates maturity status, gender, and specific app used showed a significant effect in most of the analyses performed. CONCLUSIONS: A period of mandatory and promoted use of step tracker mobile apps benefited the variables of body composition and fitness in adolescents but did not create a healthy walking habit in this population; therefore, when the use of these apps ceased to be mandatory and promoted, the effects obtained disappeared. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06164041; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06164041.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".