ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2026
Individual preferences for the design of a health coaching-based lifestyle promotion program among middle-aged adults in Hong Kong: a discrete choice experiment.
Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesHealth coaching is an effective approach to motivating lifestyle modifications and preventing the onset of non-communicable diseases. This study aims to examine middle-aged adults' preferences for health coaching programs to improve public acceptance of these programs.
methodsA discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted among adults aged 35-59 years in Hong Kong who were recruited from a population-based cohort established to evaluate outcomes related to long COVID. The DCE attributes and levels were selected based on a literature review and qualitative interviews (n = 10) with users and providers from a local health coaching program. The selected attributes included program duration, delivery mode of coaching sessions, frequency of coaching sessions, availability of blood tests, core program format, smartwatch usage, and out-of-pocket payment. An online survey with 10 choice sets was conducted to collect participants' choices regarding health coaching services with (copayment scenario, 10 choices) and without out-of-pocket payment (no copayment scenario, 10 choices). A mixed logit model and a latent class model were used for the analysis.
resultsA total of 912 responses were collected, of which 554 valid records were included in the analysis. In the copayment scenario, participants preferred programs that provided a smartwatch and a lower copayment rate. In the no copayment scenario, participants preferred a moderate coaching frequency, communication via phone calls or text messages, and provision of a smartwatch. Distinct preference groups were identified, including those who preferred face-to-face versus remote modes of delivery, high versus low contact frequency, and those who were sensitive versus insensitive to cost.
conclusionsLower copayment and smartwatch provision improve acceptance of health coaching programs. Substantial preference heterogeneity for program duration, health coaching frequency, and delivery mode was found. While material incentives are important for improving acceptance of health coaching, considerable preference heterogeneity for non-monetary attributes suggests that options for health coaching program intensity can be offered along with subsidies or lower out-of-pocket payment to promote these services.
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.