Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31144235›Full record

SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2019

Your Personal Motivator is with You: A Systematic Review of Mobile Phone Applications Aiming at Increasing Physical Activity.

Masoumeh Hosseinpour, Ralf Terlutter

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
21.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 76 citations in OpenAlex.

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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Masoumeh HosseinpourDepartment of Marketing and International Management, Alpen-Adria-Universität, Klagenfurt, Universitätsstrasse 65-67, 9020, Klagenfurt, Austria.
Ralf TerlutterDepartment of Marketing and International Management, Alpen-Adria-Universität, Klagenfurt, Universitätsstrasse 65-67, 9020, Klagenfurt, Austria. ralf.terlutter@aau.at.
University of Klagenfurt · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLiterature shows mixed evidence about the power of mobile phone applications to foster physical activity. A systematic integration that offers insights into which mobile phone application techniques can or cannot foster physical activity is lacking, as is a theoretical integration of current research.

objectivesWe performed a systematic review guided by a theoretical framework focusing on effects that certain mobile phone application techniques have on physical activity, to improve our understanding of what techniques are more or less effective.

methodsWe identified articles by searching EBSCO Business Source Complete, Science Direct, PsycINFO, Springer, PLoS ONE, Taylor and Francis, IEEE, Social Science Citation Index, Science Citation Index Expanded, PUBMED, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar. We considered articles if (1) they referred to the use of mobile phone applications to promote physical activity; (2) their methodological approach allowed one to derive appropriate results (e.g., intervention-based approach, observational study); (3) they were published in peer-reviewed journals or conference proceedings; and (4) they were written in English. The literature search resulted in 41 usable studies. Meta-synthesis and vote counting were applied to analyze these studies.

resultsBased on the ratio of supportive versus non-supportive evidence in both the qualitative and the quantitative studies, we propose the following descending rank order for the effectiveness of application techniques to foster physical activity. This is tentative in nature because the current overall small body of literature made coming to definite conclusions difficult: (1) feedback, (2) goal setting and its sub-forms, (3) competition, social sharing with familiar users in both segregated and social network groups, and (4) social sharing with strangers in segregated groups, reward, and social sharing with strangers in social network groups. Rewards in particular provided mixed results, and social sharing with strangers in segregated and social network groups seemed rather ineffective but may work under special conditions that need to be identified in additional research. One limitation of our study was that our results are mostly derived from qualitative studies, since quantitative studies are underrepresented in the field.

conclusionSeveral mobile phone application techniques were identified that have the potential to foster physical activity, whereas others were identified that are unlikely to increase physical activity. Major avenues for future research include more theoretical development and more quantitative studies, among others.

Indexed as

Cell PhoneMobile ApplicationsMotivationExerciseFeedbackGoalsHealth PromotionHumansRewardSelf Efficacy

Identifiers

PMID31144235
PMCPMC6684571
OpenAlexW2947303517

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.