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.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Continuous Glucose Monitoring for Personalized Nutrition in Real-World Vively App Users: Retrospective Observational Study.JMIR human factors · 2026Observational
- Decreased Physical Activity as an Early Digital Biomarker in Huntington's Disease: A One-Year Observational Study.Brain and behavior · 2026Observational
- Older adults' Internet use behavior and its association with accelerometer-derived physical activity.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Impact of the simultaneous distribution of e-learning and exercise videos on the health literacy and lifestyle of college students during the COVID-19 pandemic: a randomized controlled trial.Journal of physical therapy science · 2024Article
- Increasing participation in resistance training using outdoor gyms: A study protocol for the ecofit type III hybrid effectiveness implementation trial.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2024Article
- Article
- Exploring Variations in Sleep Perception: Comparative Study of Chatbot Sleep Logs and Fitbit Sleep Data.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2023Article
- Associations between app usage and behaviour change in a m-health intervention to improve physical activity and sleep health in adults: secondary analyses from two randomised controlled trials.Journal of activity, sedentary and sleep behaviors · 2023Article
- The law of non-usage attrition in a technology-based behavioral intervention for black adults with poor cardiovascular health.PLOS digital health · 2022Article
- Understanding super engaged users in the 10,000 Steps online physical activity program: A qualitative study.PloS one · 2022Article
- Long-term usage of a commercial mHealth app: A "multiple-lives" perspective.Frontiers in public health · 2022Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.