MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416356269 · doi:10.2196/70842

Development, Challenges, and Evolution of the Log2Lose Intervention for Weight Management: Randomized Controlled Digital Health Trial

2025· article· en· W4416356269 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ryan J. Shaw, Hailey Miller, Cherie Barnes, Clemontina A. Davenport, Sarah Morton-Oswald, Sarah Jackson, Michelle Bean, Jeff Cohen, Ciara Griffin, Jane Pendergast, Maren K. Olsen, Jennifer M. Gierisch, Corrine I. Voils

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBariatric Surgery and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigital healthRandomized controlled trialIntervention (counseling)Clinical trialmHealth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Long-term adherence to weight loss behaviors is challenging, as most individuals who achieve significant weight loss regain 1-2 kg per year. Financial incentives can reinforce weight-loss initiation and maintenance behaviors, but optimal strategies remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: This paper describes the design, technical architecture, and operational workflow of Log2Lose, a 5-year, multisite randomized controlled trial testing different financial incentive strategies to promote weight loss and maintenance. We detail the platform's integration with external devices, automated data collection, and adaptations to maintain intervention fidelity in the context of evolving technology and regulatory requirements. METHODS: The Log2Lose platform collects daily weight and dietary data from cellular scales and fitness tracking applications, calculates weekly incentive eligibility, and sends automated feedback and motivational text messages. We summarize the technical adaptations, message delivery performance, data completeness, and the balance between automation and manual support required to ensure data integrity. RESULTS: By the end of the study, 706 participants recorded 181,285 weights and 114,144 daily calorie entries. The platform sent 126,283 text messages and calculated 35,187 incentive payments, with 99.4% (34,976/35,187) processed automatically. Adaptations addressed device integration changes, application programming interface discontinuations, and new text messaging regulations. Despite automation, ongoing technical support was essential for resolving delivery errors, device issues, and data anomalies. CONCLUSIONS: Log2Lose demonstrated that large-scale, fully remote weight loss interventions can be implemented using consumer technology paired with a robust, adaptable platform. Success depended on flexible software design, continuous monitoring, and responsive technical support to navigate regulatory and technological changes. Log2Lose offers a practical model for processing remotely collected longitudinal dietary and weight data, providing valuable guidance for researchers, health care providers, and employers developing similar digital health interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04770909; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04770909.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 designRandomized trial
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 venueJMIR Formative Research→Same topicBariatric Surgery and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→