Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28778846›Full record

ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2017

How Do Apps Work? An Analysis of Physical Activity App Users' Perceptions of Behavior Change Mechanisms.

Taylor H Hoj, Emarie L Covey, Allyn C Jones, Amanda C Haines, P Cougar Hall, Benjamin T Crookston, Joshua H West

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

7 authors.

Taylor H HojComputational Health Science Research Group, Department of Health Science, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5215-5563
Emarie L CoveyComputational Health Science Research Group, Department of Health Science, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6709-5276
Allyn C JonesComputational Health Science Research Group, Department of Health Science, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1954-3481
Amanda C HainesComputational Health Science Research Group, Department of Health Science, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8625-4420
P Cougar HallComputational Health Science Research Group, Department of Health Science, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2927-6652
Benjamin T CrookstonComputational Health Science Research Group, Department of Health Science, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3110-9562
Joshua H WestComputational Health Science Research Group, Department of Health Science, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1086-3865

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPhysical activity apps are commonly used to increase levels of activity and health status. To date, the focus of research has been to determine the potential of apps to influence behavior, to ascertain the efficacy of a limited number of apps to change behavior, and to identify the characteristics of apps that users prefer.

objectiveThe purpose of this study was to identify the mechanisms by which the use of physical activity apps may influence the users' physical activity behavior.

methodsThis study used a cross-sectional survey of users of health-related physical activity apps during the past 6 months. An electronic survey was created in Qualtrics' Web-based survey software and deployed on Amazon Mechanical Turk. Individuals who had used at least one physical activity app in the past 6 months were eligible to respond. The final sample comprised 207 adults living in the United States. 86.0% (178/207) of respondents were between the ages of 26 and 54 years, with 51.2% (106/207) of respondents being female. Behavior change theory informed the creation of 20 survey items relating to the mechanisms of behavior change. Respondents also reported about engagement with the apps, app likeability, and physical activity behavior.

resultsRespondents reported that using a physical activity app in the past 6 months resulted in a change in their attitudes, beliefs, perceptions, and motivation. Engagement with the app (P<.001), frequency of app use (P=.03), and app price (P=.01) were related to the reported impact of the behavior change theory or mechanisms of change. The mechanisms of change were associated with self-reported physical activity behaviors (P<.001).

conclusionsThe findings from this study provide an overview of the mechanisms by which apps may impact behavior. App developers may wish to incorporate these mechanisms in an effort to increase impact. Practitioners should consider the extent to which behavior change theory is integrated into a particular app when they consider making recommendations to others wishing to increase levels of physical activity.

Indexed as

health behaviormHealthmobile appssmartphone

Identifiers

PMID28778846
PMCPMC5561388

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.