Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22532074›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2012

The role of user control in adherence to and knowledge gained from a website: randomized comparison between a tunneled version and a freedom-of-choice version.

Rik Crutzen, Dianne Cyr, Nanne K de Vries

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

49 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Measuring Acceptability and Engagement of The Keep It Up! Internet-Based HIV Prevention Randomized Controlled Trial for Young Men Who Have Sex With Men.AIDS education and prevention : official publication of the International Society for AIDS Education · 2019
    Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Exploring the "active ingredients" of an online smoking intervention: a randomized factorial trial.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2014
    Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Rik CrutzenDepartment of Health Promotion, Maastricht University/CAPHRI, Maastricht, Netherlands. rik.crutzen@maastrichtuniversity.nl
Dianne Cyr
Nanne K de Vries

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInternet-delivered interventions can effectively change health risk behaviors and their determinants, but adherence to these interventions once they are accessed is very low. Therefore, it is relevant and necessary to systematically manipulate website characteristics to test their effect on website use. This study focuses on user control as a website characteristic.

objectiveTo test whether and how user control (the freedom of choice to skip pages) can increase website use and knowledge gained from the website.

methodsParticipants older than 18 years were drawn from the Dutch Internet population (in June 2011) and completed a hepatitis knowledge questionnaire. Subsequently, they were randomly assigned to three groups: (1) a tunneled version of the website with less user control; (2) a high user control version of the website where visitors had the freedom of choice to skip pages; and (3) a control group that was not exposed to the website. Participants completed (1) a questionnaire of validated measures regarding user perceptions immediately after exposure to the website (except for the control group), and (2) a hepatitis knowledge questionnaire after one week to test whether participants in the experimental groups only clicked through the website or actually processed and learned its content. Server registrations were used to assess website use. Analyses of covariance (ANCOVA) using all available data were conducted to determine whether user control increases website use. Structural equation models (SEM) using all available data were constructed to test how user control increases website use-a latent variable derived from number of pages visited and time on website.

resultsOf the 1044 persons invited to participate, 668 took part (668/1044, 64.0%). One half of participants (332/668 49.7%) were female and the mean age was 49 years (SD 16). A total of 571 participants completed the one-week follow-up measure regarding hepatitis knowledge (571/668, 85.5%). The findings demonstrate that having less user control (ie, a tunneled version of the website) had a negative effect on users' perception of efficiency (F(1,452) = 97.69, P < .001), but a positive effect on number of pages visited (F(1,452) = 171.49, P < .001), time on the website (F(1,452) = 6.32, P = .01), and knowledge gained from the website (F(1,452) = 134.32, P < .001). The direct effect of having less user control appeared to surpass the effect mediated by efficiency, because website use was higher among participants exposed to the tunneled version of the website in comparison with those having the freedom of choice to skip pages.

conclusionsThe key finding that visitors demonstrated increased website use in the tunneled version of the website indicates that visitors should be carefully guided through the intervention for future intervention websites.

Indexed as

Consumer Health InformationHealth BehaviorInternetHumansNetherlandsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID22532074
PMCPMC3376511

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.