PURPOSE: The present study investigates the effect of the Activ-O-Meter, an internet-based computer-tailored physical activity intervention in adolescents in six European centers involved in the HELENA study. METHODS:Adolescents (12-17 years old) from Vienna, Ghent, Heraklion, Dortmund, Athens, and Stockholm were randomized into intervention and control schools. Participants in the intervention condition received the computer-tailored advice at baseline and after 1 month. Participants in the control condition received a generic standard advice. Effects were evaluated after 1 (n = 675) and 3 months (n = 494) using multi-level modeling. Physical activity levels were measured using the International Physical Activity Questionnaire for adolescents (IPAQ-A). RESULTS: After 1 month, the intervention group reported higher levels of moderate (beta = -32.8, 95% CI (confidence interval): -64.2 to -1.4) and vigorous (beta = -28.0, 95% CI: -50.7 to -5.3) physical activity in leisure time, as well as higher levels of cycling for transport (beta = -19.1, 95% CI: -34.4 to -7.6) compared to the control group. After 3 months, when the intervention group had received the tailored feedback twice, intervention effects were even stronger. Favorable changes in physical activity levels of all intensities and in different contexts were found in the tailored group compared to the control group. Among adolescents not reaching the physical activity recommendations at baseline similar effects as in the total sample were found. CONCLUSIONS: The data indicated that the computer-tailored physical activity intervention had positive effects on physical activity levels among the adolescents. However, the implementation of the computer-tailored intervention in the schools was not feasible in all countries. Copyright 2010 Society for Adolescent Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The present study investigates the effect of the Activ-O-Meter, an internet-based computer-tailored physical activity intervention in adolescents in six European centers involved in the HELENA study. METHODS: Adolescents (12-17 years old) from Vienna, Ghent, Heraklion, Dortmund, Athens, and Stockholm were randomized into intervention and control schools. Participants in the intervention condition received the computer-tailored advice at baseline and after 1 month. Participants in the control condition received a generic standard advice. Effects were evaluated after 1 (n = 675) and 3 months (n = 494) using multi-level modeling. Physical activity levels were measured using the International Physical Activity Questionnaire for adolescents (IPAQ-A). RESULTS: After 1 month, the intervention group reported higher levels of moderate (beta = -32.8, 95% CI (confidence interval): -64.2 to -1.4) and vigorous (beta = -28.0, 95% CI: -50.7 to -5.3) physical activity in leisure time, as well as higher levels of cycling for transport (beta = -19.1, 95% CI: -34.4 to -7.6) compared to the control group. After 3 months, when the intervention group had received the tailored feedback twice, intervention effects were even stronger. Favorable changes in physical activity levels of all intensities and in different contexts were found in the tailored group compared to the control group. Among adolescents not reaching the physical activity recommendations at baseline similar effects as in the total sample were found. CONCLUSIONS: The data indicated that the computer-tailored physical activity intervention had positive effects on physical activity levels among the adolescents. However, the implementation of the computer-tailored intervention in the schools was not feasible in all countries. Copyright 2010 Society for Adolescent Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: M M Fichter; N Quadflieg; K Nisslmüller; S Lindner; U Voderholzer; W Wünsch-Leiteritz; B Osen; T Huber; S Zahn; R Meermann; V Irrgang; F Bleichner Journal: Nervenarzt Date: 2011-09 Impact factor: 1.214
Authors: Lorraine B Robbins; Karin A Pfeiffer; Kimberly S Maier; Yun-Jia Lo; Stacey M Wesolek Ladrig Journal: J Sch Nurs Date: 2012-04-03 Impact factor: 2.835
Authors: Alexander Wray; Gina Martin; Emma Ostermeier; Alina Medeiros; Malcolm Little; Kristen Reilly; Jason Gilliland Journal: Health Promot Chronic Dis Prev Can Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Wayne F Velicer; Colleen A Redding; Andrea L Paiva; Leanne M Mauriello; Bryan Blissmer; Karin Oatley; Kathryn S Meier; Steven F Babbin; Heather McGee; James O Prochaska; Caitlin Burditt; Anne C Fernandez Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2013-03 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: Jerome N Rachele; Timo Jaakkola; Tracy L Washington; Thomas F Cuddihy; Steven M McPhail Journal: J Sports Sci Med Date: 2015-08-11 Impact factor: 2.988
Authors: Taylor Rose; Mary Barker; Chandni Maria Jacob; Leanne Morrison; Wendy Lawrence; Sofia Strömmer; Christina Vogel; Kathryn Woods-Townsend; David Farrell; Hazel Inskip; Janis Baird Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2017-08-16 Impact factor: 5.012
Authors: Sanne de Josselin de Jong; Math Candel; Dewi Segaar; Henricus-Paul Cremers; Hein de Vries Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2014-03-21 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Lorraine B Robbins; Karin A Pfeiffer; Amber Vermeesch; Kenneth Resnicow; Zhiying You; Lawrence An; Stacey M Wesolek Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2013-05-15 Impact factor: 3.295