David E Conroy1, Sarah Hojjatinia2, Constantino M Lagoa2, Chih-Hsiang Yang3, Stephanie T Lanza4, Joshua M Smyth4. 1. Department of Kinesiology and Human Development and Family Studies, The Pennsylvania State University; Department of Preventive Medicine, Northwestern University. 2. Department of Electrical Engineering, The Pennsylvania State University. 3. Department of Kinesiology, The Pennsylvania State University; Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California. 4. Department of Biobehavioral Health, The Pennsylvania State University.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The conceptual models underlying physical activity interventions have been based largely on differences between more and less active people. Yet physical activity is a dynamic behavior, and such models are not sensitive to factors that regulate behavior at a momentary level or how people respond to individual attempts at intervening. We demonstrate how a control systems engineering approach can be applied to develop personalized models of behavioral responses to an intensive text message-based intervention. DESIGN & METHOD: To establish proof-of-concept for this approach, 10 adults wore activity monitors for 16 weeks and received five text messages daily at random times. Message content was randomly selected from three types of messages designed to target (1) social-cognitive processes associated with increasing physical activity, (2) social-cognitive processes associated with reducing sedentary behavior, or (3) general facts unrelated to either physical activity or sedentary behavior. A dynamical systems model was estimated for each participant to examine the magnitude and timing of responses to each type of text message. RESULTS: Models revealed heterogeneous responses to different message types that varied between people and between weekdays and weekends. CONCLUSIONS: This proof-of-concept demonstration suggests that parameters from this model can be used to develop personalized algorithms for intervention delivery. More generally, these results demonstrate the potential utility of control systems engineering models for optimizing physical activity interventions.
OBJECTIVES: The conceptual models underlying physical activity interventions have been based largely on differences between more and less active people. Yet physical activity is a dynamic behavior, and such models are not sensitive to factors that regulate behavior at a momentary level or how people respond to individual attempts at intervening. We demonstrate how a control systems engineering approach can be applied to develop personalized models of behavioral responses to an intensive text message-based intervention. DESIGN & METHOD: To establish proof-of-concept for this approach, 10 adults wore activity monitors for 16 weeks and received five text messages daily at random times. Message content was randomly selected from three types of messages designed to target (1) social-cognitive processes associated with increasing physical activity, (2) social-cognitive processes associated with reducing sedentary behavior, or (3) general facts unrelated to either physical activity or sedentary behavior. A dynamical systems model was estimated for each participant to examine the magnitude and timing of responses to each type of text message. RESULTS: Models revealed heterogeneous responses to different message types that varied between people and between weekdays and weekends. CONCLUSIONS: This proof-of-concept demonstration suggests that parameters from this model can be used to develop personalized algorithms for intervention delivery. More generally, these results demonstrate the potential utility of control systems engineering models for optimizing physical activity interventions.
Entities:
Keywords:
computational model; precision medicine; short message service (SMS); system identification
Authors: S Shiffman; M H Balabanis; J A Paty; J Engberg; C J Gwaltney; K S Liu; M Gnys; M Hickcox; S M Paton Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2000-07 Impact factor: 4.267
Authors: David E Conroy; Ashley B West; Deborah Brunke-Reese; Edison Thomaz; Necole M Streeper Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2020-12 Impact factor: 4.267
Authors: Sarah Hojjatinia; Sahar Hojjatinia; Constantino M Lagoa; Deborah Brunke-Reese; David E Conroy Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2021-08 Impact factor: 5.556
Authors: Chloë Williamson; Graham Baker; Jennifer R Tomasone; Adrian Bauman; Nanette Mutrie; Ailsa Niven; Justin Richards; Adewale Oyeyemi; Beelin Baxter; Benjamin Rigby; Benny Cullen; Brendan Paddy; Brett Smith; Charlie Foster; Clare Drummy; Corneel Vandelanotte; Emily Oliver; Fatwa Sari Tetra Dewi; Fran McEwen; Frances Bain; Guy Faulkner; Hamish McEwen; Hayley Mills; Jack Brazier; James Nobles; Jennifer Hall; Kaleigh Maclaren; Karen Milton; Kate Olscamp; Lisseth Villalobos Campos; Louise Bursle; Marie Murphy; Nick Cavill; Nora J Johnston; Paul McCrorie; Rakhmat Ari Wibowo; Rebecca Bassett-Gunter; Rebecca Jones; Sarah Ruane; Trevor Shilton; Paul Kelly Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2021-12-19 Impact factor: 8.915
Authors: Reza Daryabeygi-Khotbehsara; Sheikh Mohammed Shariful Islam; David Dunstan; Jenna McVicar; Mohamed Abdelrazek; Ralph Maddison Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2021-09-13 Impact factor: 5.428