Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34142966›Full record

Observational studyJournal of medical Internet research2021

The Association Between Logging Steps Using a Website, App, or Fitbit and Engaging With the 10,000 Steps Physical Activity Program: Observational Study.

Anna T Rayward, Corneel Vandelanotte, Anetta Van Itallie, Mitch J Duncan

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of medical Internet research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
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.

Anna T RaywardSchool of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3029-9288
Corneel VandelanotteSchool of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4445-8094
Anetta Van ItallieSchool of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6506-1996
Mitch J DuncanSchool of Medicine & Public Health, College of Health, Medicine and Wellbeing, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9166-6195

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEngagement is positively associated with the effectiveness of digital health interventions. It is unclear whether tracking devices that automatically synchronize data (eg, Fitbit) produce different engagement levels compared with manually entering data.

objectiveThis study examines how different step logging methods in the freely available 10,000 Steps physical activity program differ according to age and gender and are associated with program engagement.

methodsA subsample of users (n=22,142) of the free 10,000 Steps physical activity program were classified into one of the following user groups based on the step-logging method: Website Only (14,617/22,142, 66.01%), App Only (2100/22,142, 9.48%), Fitbit Only (1705/22,142, 7.7%), Web and App (2057/22,142, 9.29%), and Fitbit Combination (combination of web, app, and Fitbit; 1663/22,142, 7.51%). Generalized linear regression and binary logistic regression were used to examine differences between user groups' engagement and participation parameters. The time to nonusage attrition was assessed using Cox proportional hazards regression.

resultsApp Only users were significantly younger and Fitbit user groups had higher proportions of women compared with other groups. The following outcomes were significant and relative to the Website Only group. The App Only group had fewer website sessions (odds ratio [OR] -6.9, 95% CI -7.6 to -6.2), whereas the Fitbit Only (OR 10.6, 95% CI 8.8-12.3), Web and App (OR 1.5, 95% CI 0.4-2.6), and Fitbit Combination (OR 8.0; 95% CI 6.2-9.7) groups had more sessions. The App Only (OR -0.7, 95% CI -0.9 to -0.4) and Fitbit Only (OR -0.5, 95% CI -0.7 to -0.2) groups spent fewer minutes on the website per session, whereas the Fitbit Combination group (OR 0.2, 95% CI 0.0-0.5) spent more minutes. All groups, except the Fitbit Combination group, viewed fewer website pages per session. The mean daily step count was lower for the App Only (OR -201.9, 95% CI -387.7 to -116.0) and Fitbit Only (OR -492.9, 95% CI -679.9 to -305.8) groups but higher for the Web and App group (OR 258.0, 95% CI 76.9-439.2). The Fitbit Only (OR 5.0, 95% CI 3.4-6.6), Web and App (OR 7.2, 95% CI 5.9-8.6), and Fitbit Combination (OR 15.6, 95% CI 13.7-17.5) groups logged a greater number of step entries. The App Only group was less likely (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.46-0.94) and other groups were more likely to participate in Challenges. The mean time to nonusage attrition was 35 (SD 26) days and was lower than average in the Website Only and App Only groups and higher than average in the Web and App and Fitbit Combination groups.

conclusionsUsing a Fitbit in combination with the 10,000 Steps app or website enhanced engagement with a real-world physical activity program. Integrating tracking devices that synchronize data automatically into real-world physical activity interventions is one strategy for improving engagement.

Indexed as

Mobile ApplicationsExerciseFemaleFitness TrackersHumansLogistic ModelsOdds Ratioactivity trackerseHealthengagementFitbitmobile phonepedometerphysical activity intervention

Identifiers

PMID34142966
PMCPMC8277402

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.