ArticlePLOS digital health2026
Mixed-methods assessment of engagement with a digital intervention: The Wrapped feasibility randomised controlled trial.
Article in PLOS digital health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Digital health behaviour change interventions can face the challenge of low participant engagement, which can limit intervention effectiveness. Mixed methods approaches to understanding engagement, which capture the online and offline behaviours of participants, as well as the cognitive and affective aspects of engagement, are infrequently reported. The aim of this study was to explore these aspects of engagement for a digital intervention (Wrapped) to enable its optimisation ahead of testing in a randomised controlled trial (RCT). Wrapped is a digital intervention that aims to increase correct and consistent condom use, thereby decreasing the incidence of sexually transmitted infections among young people aged 16-24 years. Analytics data and website user history data were combined with data from surveys and qualitative interviews. Together this data was examined to assess the behavioural, cognitive, and affective aspects of engagement with the intervention. Results showed that participants experienced few barriers during the registration process, but that the tailoring questions used to assign content to individual users may not have been working as intended. Pre-determined intervention goals were as follows: ordering Sample Pack 48 (60.8%), using Condom Ordering Service 37 (52.9%), ordering Condom Carrier 31 (49.2%), watching Condom Demo video 7 (10%), watching Discussing Condoms video 4 (6.8%), and watching Real Life video 9 (13.6%). Participants described their use and enjoyment of the products they ordered; notably the condom carrier was less well liked and used. Participants reported not engaging with the video components, either because they were unaware that they existed or because they expected to find watching them to feel awkward. This study demonstrates that taking a mixed-methods approach to studying engagement provides a more complete understanding of where and how digital interventions need to be optimised than using single methods in isolation; this in turn is likely to lead to more effective interventions. Trial registration: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN17478654.
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.