Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31670693›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2019

Identifying the Most Autonomy-Supportive Message Frame in Digital Health Communication: A 2x2 Between-Subjects Experiment.

Eline Suzanne Smit, Chamoetal Zeidler, Ken Resnicow, Hein de Vries

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05825040 (Randomized Controlled Trial on Precision Mental Health), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

NCT05825040 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Randomized Controlled Trial on Precision Mental Health

TypeinterventionalSponsorChinese University of Hong KongRan2024 to 2028Enrolled320ConditionsMental Well-being, Mental Health Issue, Mental Health Wellness 1, Precision Mental HealthArmsOnline guided transdiagnostic cognitive behavioural therapy, Online self-guided transdiagnostic cognitive behavioural therapy, Online self-guided mindfulness-based intervention
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Examining the Effect of Self-Determined Appeal Organ Donation Messages and Respective Underlying Mechanism.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  14. Shared Decision Making in Health Care: Theoretical Perspectives for Why It Works and For Whom.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2022
    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

4 authors.

Eline Suzanne SmitDepartment of Communication Science, Amsterdam School of Communication Research, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8588-6194
Chamoetal ZeidlerDepartment of Communication Science, Amsterdam School of Communication Research, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-5386-9127
Ken ResnicowSchool of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-1416-9627
Hein de VriesDepartment of Health Promotion, Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3640-2517

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe effectiveness of digital health communication may be increased by enhancing autonomy supportiveness.

objectiveThis study aimed to identify the most autonomy-supportive message frame within an intervention for increasing vegetable intake by testing the effect of the following 2 strategies: (1) using autonomy-supportive language and (2) providing choice.

methodsA Web-based 2 (autonomy-supportive vs controlling language)×2 (choice vs no choice) experiment was conducted among 526 participants, recruited via a research panel. The main outcome measures were perceived autonomy support (measured using the Virtual Care Climate Questionnaire, answered with scores 1 to 5), perceived relevance (measured with one question, answered with scores 1 to 5), and overall evaluation of the intervention (measured with 1 open-ended question, answered with scores 1 to 10).

resultsChoice had a significant positive effect on the overall evaluation of the intervention (b=.12; P=.003), whereas for participants with a high need for autonomy, there was a significant positive effect on perceived relevance (b=.13; P=.02). The positive effect of choice on perceived autonomy support approached significance (b=.07; P=.07). No significant effects on any of the three outcomes were observed for language.

conclusionsResults suggest that provision of choice rather than the use of autonomy-supportive language can be an easy-to-implement strategy to increase the effectiveness of digital forms of health communication, especially for people with a high need for autonomy.

Indexed as

Personal AutonomyAdolescentAdultAgedFemaleHealth CommunicationHealth PromotionHumansInternetMaleMiddle AgedResearch DesignSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adulthealth behaviorhealth communicationhealth promotionhealthy dietinternetpersonal autonomyself-determination theory

Identifiers

PMID31670693
PMCPMC6914245

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.