MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408903345 · doi:10.2196/65863

Interactive Effects of Weight Recording Frequency and the Volume of Chat Communication With Health Care Professionals on Weight Loss in mHealth Interventions for Noncommunicable Diseases: Retrospective Observational Study

2025· article· en· W4408903345 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yuta Hagiwara, Takuji Adachi, Masashi Kanai, S Ishida, Takahiro Miki

Bibliographic record

VenueInteractive Journal of Medical Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionWeight lossmHealthMedicineModerationObesityHealth careHealth promotionWeight changeObservational studyFamily medicineGerontologyNursingPsychologyPublic healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Mobile health (mHealth) apps are increasingly used for health promotion, particularly for managing noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) through behavior modification. Understanding the factors associated with successful weight loss in such interventions can improve program effectiveness. Objective: This study examined factors influencing weight change and the relationship between weight recording frequency and chat volume with health care professionals on weight loss in individuals with obesity and NCDs. Methods: The participants had obesity (BMI ≥25 kg/m²) and were diagnosed with NCDs (eg, hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia). The program included 12 telephone consultations with health care professionals. Only participants who completed the full 6-month program, including all 12 telephone consultations, and provided an end-of-study weight were included in the analysis. The primary outcome was the rate of weight change, defined as the percentage change in weight from the initial period (first 14 days) to the final period (2 weeks before the last consultation), relative to the initial weight. The key independent variables were proportion of days with weight recording and chat communication volume (total messages exchanged). An interaction term between these variables was included to assess moderation effects in the regression analysis. The volume of communication was measured as the total number of messages exchanged, with each message, regardless of who sent it, being counted as 1 interaction. Health care staffs were instructed to send a single scheduled chat message per week following each biweekly phone consultation. These scheduled messages primarily included personalized feedback, reminders, and motivational support. In addition, providers responded to participant-initiated messages at any time during the program. Furthermore, 1 professional responded to each participant. Hierarchical multiple regression and simple slope analyses were conducted to identify relationships and interactions among these variables. Results: The final analysis of this study included 2423 participants. Significant negative associations were found between the rate of weight change and baseline BMI (β=-.10; P<.001), proportion of days with weight recording (β=-.017; P<.001), and communication volume (β=-.193; P<.001). The interaction between proportion of days with weight recording and chat frequency also showed a significantly negative effect on weight change (β=-.01; P<.001). Simple slope analysis showed that when the proportion of days with weight recording was +1 SD above the mean, frequent chats were associated with greater weight reduction (slope=-0.60; P<.001), whereas no significant effect was observed at -1 SD (slope=-0.01; P=.94). Conclusions: The findings suggest that both the proportion of days with weight recording and communication volume independently and interactively influence weight change in individuals with obesity and NCDs.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.574
Teacher spread0.465 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInteractive Journal of Medical ResearchSame topicMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207