| Literature DB >> 23827796 |
Melinda J Hutchesson1, Clare E Collins, Philip J Morgan, Robin Callister.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Initial engagement and weight loss within Web-based weight loss programs may predict long-term success. The integration of persuasive Web-based features may boost engagement and therefore weight loss.Entities:
Keywords: Internet; commercial sector; retention; user engagement; weight loss
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23827796 PMCID: PMC3713892 DOI: 10.2196/jmir.2540
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Med Internet Res ISSN: 1438-8871 Impact factor: 5.428
Description of the key components of the Biggest Loser Club (BLC) and Shannan Challenge (SC) programs linked to Persuasive Systems Design 4 categories.
| Component | BLC | SC |
|
|
| |
|
| Individualized calorie targets based on participants’ estimated total energy expenditure at enrollment based on their reported height, weight, and activity level and their desire to lose weight (–500kcal/day less than estimated expenditure) or maintain their weight [Primary Task Support]. | Calorie target is 1200 calories for all participants. The exercise plan is 6 days/wk with aim to burn 600 calories/day [Primary Task Support]. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Food and physical activity diaries to monitor calorie targets and search engines to facilitate entry of food data [Primary Task Support]. | As per BLC |
|
| Monitoring of reported body weight, waist and hip girths; graphical display of changes in data and body (BMI) silhouette. Participants were encouraged to “weigh in” once/wk [Primary Task & Dialogue Support]. | As per BLC plus weight loss leader board with a prize for member who achieves the greatest percentage weight loss each week [Primary Task, Dialogue & Social Support]. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Daily and weekly calculations of energy balance and meeting recommended nutrient and food group targets from online diary [Dialogue Support]. | As per BLC |
|
| Automated (computer-generated) weekly personalized feedback on their dietary intake and exercise based on their diary entries, as well as their use or lack of use of the standard website features, and the level of success of their weight loss [Dialogue Support]. | As per BLC |
|
|
|
|
|
| Weekly menu plan and grocery list [Primary Task Support]. | As per BLC |
|
| Weekly physical activity plan [Primary Task Support]. | As per BLC plus choice of a Home or Gym exercise program including video demonstrations from a celebrity personal trainer “Shannan” [System Credibility Support]. |
|
| Weekly tutorials, fact sheets, and challenges, which participants are prompted to access via a weekly email [Primary Task Support]. | As per BLC |
|
|
|
|
|
| Discussion forum [Social Support] | Exclusive discussion forum where only Challenge members can post comments [Social Support]. |
|
| Historical online meetings hosted by an accredited practicing dietitian could be viewed by BLC participants [Social Support]. | Weekly video blog with personal trainer “Shannan” [Social & System Credibility Support]. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Participants received weekly reminders to weigh in via email or SMS [Dialogue Support]. | As per BLC |
Baseline characteristics of participants who enrolled in the BLC or the SC programs.
|
| Total (n=1334) | BLC (n=953) | SC (n=381) |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Female | 85.9 (1146) | 85.2 (812) | 87.7 (334) | .22 |
| Age in yrs, mean (SD) |
| 36.7 (10.3) | 36.5 (10.7) | 37.1 (9.1) | .35 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Anglo-Saxon | 51.0 (680) | 49.5 (472) | 54.6 (208) | .55 |
|
| Other | 18.8 (251) | 19.9 (189) | 16.3 (62) |
|
|
| Did not wish to respond | 30.2 (403) | 30.6 (292) | 29.1 (111) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 32.3 (7.0) | 33.0 (7.1) | 30.6 (6.5) | <.001 |
|
| Normal weight % (n) | 12.4 (166) | 10.3 (98) | 17.9 (68) | <.001 |
|
| Overweight % (n) | 31.8 (424) | 29.1 (277) | 38.6 (147) |
|
|
| Obese % (n) | 55.8 (744) | 60.7 (578) | 43.6 (166) |
|
Differences between programs tested using chi-square test for categorical data and t tests for continuous data.
Weight change after 8 weeks for BLC and SC participants using GLMM and LOCF (all analyses controlled for baseline age and gender).
|
| Mean (95% CI) | Effect size, |
| ||||
|
| Total (n=1334) | BLC (n=953) | SC (n=381) | Difference between groups |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
| Absolute (kg) | -4.6 (-4.9, -4.4) | -4.5 (-4.8, -4.2) | -5.1 (-5.5, -4.6) | -0.6 (-1.2, -0.6) | 0.06 | .03 |
|
| Percentage (%) | -5.3 (-5.4, -5.1) | -5.0 (-5.2. -4.7) | -6.0 (-6.4, -5.7) | -1.1 (-1.5, -0.7) | 0.14 | <.001 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
| Absolute (kg) | -2.7 (-2.9, -2.6) | -2.6 (-2.9, -2.4) | -3.0 (-3.3, -2.6) | -0.3 (-0.5, -0.2) | 0.09 | .005 |
|
| Percentage (%) | -3.0 (-3.2, -2.8) | -2.9 (-3.1, -2.6) | -3.4 (-3.7, -3.0) | -0.5 (-0.7, -0.4) | 0.15 | <.001 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
| Weight gain, % (n) | 3.9 (52) | 4.7 (45) | 1.8 (7) | N/A | N/A | .02 |
|
| 0% to <5%, % (n) | 72.1 (962) | 72.6 (692) | 70.9 (270) |
|
|
|
|
| 5% to <10%, % (n) | 20.8 (278) | 20.0 (191) | 22.8 (87) |
|
|
|
|
| 10% or more % (n) | 3.2 (42) | 2.6 (25) | 4.5 (17) |
|
|
|
Website use by BLC and SC participants from enrollment to 8 weeks.
|
| BLC (n=953) | SC (n=381) |
| |||
|
| Percentage used, | Frequencya
| Percentage used, | Frequencya
| Percentage usedb
| Frequencyc |
| Weekly weigh-in | 97.8 (932) | 5 (2-8) | 97.6 (372) | 5 (2-8) | .86 | .83 |
| Online diary—food | 86.3 (822) | 11 (3-28) | 80.6 (307) | 8 (1-25) | .009 | .006 |
| Online diary—exercise | 77.7 (740) | 4 (1-11) | 73.2 (279) | 5 (0-14) | .09 | .46 |
| Discussion forum posts | 39.9 (380) | 0 (0-2) | 73.8 (281) | 5 (0-22) | <.001 | <.001 |
| Discussion forum views | 19.6 (187) | 0 (0-0) | 55.4 (211) | 1 (0-8) | <.001 | <.001 |
| Accessed menu plan | 91.0 (867) | 3 (1-9) | 96.3 (367) | 8 (3-15) | <.001 | <.001 |
| Accessed physical activity plan | 84.2 (802) | 2 (1-4) | 94.8 (361) | 6 (3-11) | <.001 | <.001 |
| Accessed weekly educational tips and challenges | 88.9 (847) | 2 (1-5) | 93.4 (356) | 5 (2-8) | .01 | <.001 |
| Attended weekly online meeting (webinar) | N/A | N/A | 57.0 (217) | 1 (0-2) | N/A | N/A |
aFrequency is the number of days the feature was used.
bDifference between the two programs tested using chi-square test.
cDifference between the two programs tested using Wilcoxon Rank Sum test.