Mobile Health Biometrics to Enhance Exercise and Physical Activity Adherence in Type 2 Diabetes (MOTIVATE-T2D) : a decentralised feasibility randomised controlled trial delivered across the UK and Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Assess the feasibility of a mobile health (mHealth)-supported home-delivered physical activity (PA) intervention (MOTIVATE-T2D) in people with recently diagnosed type 2 diabetes (T2D). DESIGN: Feasibility multicentre, parallel group, randomised controlled trial (RCT). SETTING: Participants were recruited from England and Canada using a decentralised design. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (40-75 years) recently diagnosed with T2D (5-24 months). INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomised 1:1 to intervention (MOTIVATE-T2D) or active control groups. Participants codesigned 6month- home-delivered, personalised, progressive PA programmes supported by virtual behavioural counselling. MOTIVATE-T2D used biofeedback from wearable technologies to support the programme. The active control group received the same intervention without wearables. OUTCOMES: The primary outcomes were recruitment rate, retention and adherence to purposeful exercise. Clinical data on effectiveness were collected as exploratory outcomes at baseline, 6 and 12 months, with HbA1c and systolic blood pressure (BP) proposed as primary outcomes for a future full RCT. RESULTS: n=135 eligible participants expressed an interest in the trial, resulting in 125 participants randomised (age 55±9 years, 48% female, 81% white), a recruitment rate of 93%. Retention at 12 months was 82%. MOTIVATE-T2D participants were more likely to start (OR 10.4, CI 3.4 to 32.1) and maintain purposeful exercise at 6 (OR 7.1, CI 3.2 to 15.7) and 12 months (OR 2.9, CI 1.2 to 7.4). Exploratory clinical outcomes showed a potential effect in favour of MOTIVATE-T2D, including proposed primary outcomes HbA1c and systolic BP (between-group mean differences: HbA1c: 6 months: -5% change from baseline, CI -10 to 2: 12 months: -2% change from baseline, CI -8 to -4; systolic BP: 6 months: -1 mm Hg, CI -5 to 3: 12 months: -4 mm Hg, CI -8 to 1). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the feasibility of delivering the MOTIVATE-T2D mHealth-supported PA intervention for people with recently diagnosed T2D and progression to a full RCT to examine its clinical and cost-effectiveness. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN: 14335124; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT0465353.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".