| Literature DB >> 32098625 |
Marc Mitchell1,2, Erica Lau3, Lauren White4, Guy Faulkner3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Top tier commercial physical activity apps rarely undergo peer-reviewed evaluation. Even fewer are assessed beyond six months, the theoretical threshold for behaviour maintenance. The purpose of this study was to examine whether a multi-component commercial app rewarding users with digital incentives for walking was associated with an increase in physical activity over one year.Entities:
Keywords: Behavioural economics; Mhealth; Physical activity; Public health; Rewards
Year: 2020 PMID: 32098625 PMCID: PMC7043029 DOI: 10.1186/s12966-020-00926-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act ISSN: 1479-5868 Impact factor: 6.457
Fig. 1Carrot Rewards app “Steps” walking program screenshot
Carrot Rewards “Steps” walking program timeline and evolution
| Date | Milestone | Description |
|---|---|---|
| June 13, 2016 | “Steps” Program Launches | “Steps” launches in British Columbia and Newfoundland & Labrador |
| July 8, 2016 | First Goal Modified | 1000 step increase initially added to baseline mean to set daily goal is removed |
| July 28, 2016 | “Step Up Challenge” Launches | Users earn bonus reward for achieving 10 or more daily goals in 14 days |
| September 20, 2016 | FitBit Integration | Users given option of tracking steps with any FitBit device |
| October, 2016 | Mid-Week Bonuses | For the month of October users earn 2, 5, or 10 times the points for reaching daily goals on Wednesdays |
| February 9, 2017 | ‘Smart Goals’ | Adaptive goal setting introduced where users’ goals re-calculated every 2–4 weeks using data from last 30 days |
| July 9, 2017 | Evaluation Period Ends | 12-month evaluation period concludes |
Baseline characteristics of study participants by engagement group, and Canadians in general
| Limited (< 12 weeks) | Occasional (12–23 weeks) | Regular (24–51 weeks) | Committed (52 weeks) | Total | Canadian Population | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sample size | 8349 | 7259 | 15,557 | 7948 | 39,113 | 35,151,728 |
| Age, years (mean, SD) | 33.2 (11.9) | 33.0 (11.4) | 33.7 (11.4) | 35.0 (11.6) | 33.7 (11.6) | 40.6 (median) |
| Gender, (% female) | 65.8 | 66.8 | 67.2 | 63.1 | 66.0 | 50.4 |
| Province, (% BC) | 69.3 | 69.7 | 74.2 | 76.8 | 72.8 | 13.2 |
| Median Personal Income, (mean, SD; thousand CAD/year) | 29,560 (3880) | 29,519 (3936) | 29,452 (4019) | 29,597 (4130) | 29,517 (3998) | 35,680 |
| Steps per day, baseline mean, (SD) | 5349 (2657) | 5443 (2693) | 5433 (2642) | 6136 (2907) | 5560 (2726) | 8965a |
Note. SD standard deviation, CAD Canadian a Colley et al. 2011 [37]
BC British Columbia
Changes in mean daily step counts between baseline and the last two recorded weeks stratified by engagement group and physical activity status within engagement group, least-square means (LSM) and 95% confidence intervals
| Differencesa (Average of last two recorded weeks - Baseline) | Cohen’s f2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Limited users | − 392.3 (− 439.9 to − 344.7) | 0.0173 |
| Occasional users | − 473.2 (− 527.4 to − 418.9) | 0.0211 |
| Regular users | 448.8 (407.9 to 489.7) | 0.0156 |
| Committed users | 884.6 (824.8 to 944.4) | 0.0563 |
| Physical inactive, Limited users | 388.6 (333.6 to 443.6) | 0.0287 |
| Physically inactive, Occasional users | 435.5 (372.2 to 498.9) | 0.0306 |
| Physically inactive, Regular users | 1215 (1163 to 1266) | 0.1617 |
| Physically inactive, Committed users | 1821 (1739 to 1902) | 0.3140 |
| Physically active, Limited users | − 957.9 (− 1027 to − 888.3) | 0.0818 |
| Physically active, Occasional users | − 1141 (− 1219 to − 1062) | 0.1011 |
| Physically active, Regular users | −161.1 (− 220.4 to −101.7) | 0.0017 |
| Physically active, Committed users | 262.3 (181.4 to 343.3) | 0.0059 |
Note: LSM have been averaged over the levels of gender and province and assumed an average level for all of the other continuous demographic variables included in the model. Cohen’s f ≥ 0.02, f ≥ 0.15, and f ≥ 0.35 represents small, medium, and large effect sizes, respectively
aThe difference between baseline and the average of last two recorded weeks were statistically significant at P < .0001 for all sub-group analyses
Fig. 2Longitudinal changes in weekly recorded mean step counts by physical activity status and engagement group, with 95% confidence intervals (dotted line). Models adjusted for baseline set date and baseline daily step counts. a-b, ‘Limited’ users; c-d, ‘Occasional’ users; e-f, ‘Regular’ users; g-h, ‘Committed’ users