Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30446482›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2018

Measuring Engagement in eHealth and mHealth Behavior Change Interventions: Viewpoint of Methodologies.

Camille E Short, Ann DeSmet, Catherine Woods, Susan L Williams, Carol Maher, Anouk Middelweerd, Andre Matthias Müller, Petra A Wark, Corneel Vandelanotte, Louise Poppe and 2 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04287218 (A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing the Efficacy of Therapist Guided Internet-delivered Cognitive Therapy), which is not on this map. Cited by 259 papers, 18 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
259citing papers in PubMed, 18 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.

NCT04287218 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing the Efficacy of Therapist Guided Internet-delivered Cognitive Therapy (TG-iConquerFear) With Augmented Treatment as Usual in Reducing Fear of Cancer Recurrence in Danish Colorectal Cancer Survivors

TypeinterventionalSponsorVejle HospitalRan2023 to 2026Enrolled95ConditionsFear of Cancer Recurrence, Colorectal Cancer, Anxiety, Health AnxietyArmsTG-iConquerFear, aTAU
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

259 citing papers in PubMed, 18 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

199 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

12 authors.

Camille E ShortFreemasons Foundation Centre for Men's Health, School of Medicine, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4177-4251
Ann DeSmetDepartment of Movement and Sports Sciences, Ghent University, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-7473-140X
Catherine WoodsHealth Research Institute, Centre for Physical Activity and Health, Department of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-0892-6591
Susan L WilliamsPhysical Activity Research Group, Appleton Institute, School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4289-9248
Carol MaherAlliance for Research in Exercise, Nutrition and Activity, Sansom Institute, School of Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8676-0224
Anouk MiddelweerdDepartment of Rheumatology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-1274-968X
Andre Matthias MüllerSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0001-5770-6723
Petra A WarkCentre for Innovative Research Across the Life Course, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Coventry University, Coventry, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-1020-4640
Corneel VandelanottePhysical Activity Research Group, Appleton Institute, School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4445-8094
Louise PoppeDepartment of Movement and Sports Sciences, Ghent University, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-9285-6962
Melanie D HingleDepartment of Nutritional Sciences, College of Agriculture & Life Sciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-6696-5601
Rik CrutzenDepartment of Health Promotion, Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3731-6610

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Engagement in electronic health (eHealth) and mobile health (mHealth) behavior change interventions is thought to be important for intervention effectiveness, though what constitutes engagement and how it enhances efficacy has been somewhat unclear in the literature. Recently published detailed definitions and conceptual models of engagement have helped to build consensus around a definition of engagement and improve our understanding of how engagement may influence effectiveness. This work has helped to establish a clearer research agenda. However, to test the hypotheses generated by the conceptual modules, we need to know how to measure engagement in a valid and reliable way. The aim of this viewpoint is to provide an overview of engagement measurement options that can be employed in eHealth and mHealth behavior change intervention evaluations, discuss methodological considerations, and provide direction for future research. To identify measures, we used snowball sampling, starting from systematic reviews of engagement research as well as those utilized in studies known to the authors. A wide range of methods to measure engagement were identified, including qualitative measures, self-report questionnaires, ecological momentary assessments, system usage data, sensor data, social media data, and psychophysiological measures. Each measurement method is appraised and examples are provided to illustrate possible use in eHealth and mHealth behavior change research. Recommendations for future research are provided, based on the limitations of current methods and the heavy reliance on system usage data as the sole assessment of engagement. The validation and adoption of a wider range of engagement measurements and their thoughtful application to the study of engagement are encouraged.

Indexed as

Health BehaviorHealth PromotionHumansSelf ReportSurveys and QuestionnairesTelemedicineTreatment Outcomeevaluation studieshealth promotioninternetoutcome and process assessment (health care)telemedicinetreatment adherence and compliance

Identifiers

PMID30446482
PMCPMC6269627

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.