Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39221083›Full record

ArticleDigital health

Maintaining healthy lifestyle through fitness app use: A parallel mediation model from a nationwide survey.

Min Zhang, Xiaojing Li

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Min ZhangSchool of Media & Communication, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, P. R. China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-5083-2215
Xiaojing LiSchool of Media & Communication, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, P. R. China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8473-5594

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Adolescents face various health challenges due to academic pressures and sedentary lifestyles. Establishing healthy habits during this critical period is essential for long-term well-being. With the widespread use of fitness apps, understanding their impact on adolescent health behaviors and the underlying mechanisms is crucial. Guided by social support theory and social comparison theory, this study examined the influence of WeRun, a fitness app within WeChat, on adolescents' adoption of healthy lifestyles. It investigated the correlation between WeRun usage and healthy behaviors, as well as the underlying mechanisms driving this relationship. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted across 31 provinces and metropolitans in China, utilizing a random cluster sampling approach targeting high school and freshman students aged 15-24 ( Results: The analysis showed that WeRun use positively predicted both social support and social comparison. Meanwhile, both social support and social comparison were positively associated with healthy lifestyles. Additionally, WeRun use could not directly predict healthy lifestyles. However, WeRun use indirectly predicted healthy lifestyles via social support and social comparison. Conclusions: The study's findings revealed the pivotal roles of social support and social comparison as mediating variables in the relationship between adolescents' WeRun usage and adoption of healthy lifestyles. The results contributed to the current comprehension of the mechanisms linking app utilization to health-promoting behaviors. Furthermore, it provided valuable insights for promoting adolescent health and informed improved design strategies for fitness apps.

Indexed as

Adolescentshealthy lifestylessocial comparisonsocial supportWeRun

Identifiers

PMID39221083
PMCPMC11363243

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.