| Literature DB >> 35164721 |
Moria Golan1,2, Shakked Benifla3, Aviv Samo3, Noa Alon3, Maya Mozeikov3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study assessed the feasibility and effect of two mobile modes (WhatsApp vs. a specially designed app) in their delivery of updates and assignments to parents.Entities:
Keywords: Body esteem; Mobile application; Prevention; School-based; Self-esteem
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35164721 PMCID: PMC8842894 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-022-12581-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 3.295
Fig. 1Flow chart of research participation in both studies
Content and description of the program sessions
Fig. 2Screenshots (translated to English) from the “Favoring Myself” smartphone application
Overview of measures used to evaluate program efficacy in students and parents
RSE The Rosenberg Self Esteem Scale, BES The Body Esteem Scale, ChEDE-Q-8 The Eating Disorders Examination Questionnaire-8 adapted for children, SATAQ-4 The Sociocultural Attitudes Towards Appearance Questionnaire-4
Baseline demographic characteristics of the study population in both digital delivery modes
*Calculated by the number of people per room in residence
M, mean; SD, standard deviation
1chi-square test for gender/parental status, Kruskal-Wallis Test for age/Socioeconomic status
Adolescents’ baseline outcome measures in both digital modes
M mean, Med median, SD standard deviation, RSE The Rosenberg Self Esteem Scale, BES The Body Esteem Scale, Eat-26 The Eating Attitudes Test, SATAQ-4 The Sociocultural Attitudes Towards Appearance Questionnaire-4
From allocation to analysis - number and percentages of participants in both digital modes along research stages
Fig. 3Number of Dyad’s shared assignments’ submission (parental component arm) delivered through WhatsApp vs. the special application
Special application mode: Self-care territory in the three groups over time
1Group effect (Kruskal-Wallis Test) – marked in bold the significant differences (after p-value correction).
Effect size: eta-squared interpretation is: < 0.06 (small effect), 0.06 - < 0.14 (moderate effect) and > = 0.14 (large effect).
2Time effect (Friedman’s Chi-Square Test) – marked in bold the significant differences (after p. value correction).
Effect size: Kendall’s W interpretation is: < 0.3 (small effect), 0.3 - < 0.5 (moderate effect) and > = 0.5 (large effect).
M, Mean; Med, Median.
Fig. 4WhatsApp mode: Youths’ self-esteem in the three groups over time
Special application mode: Youths’ self-esteem in the three groups over time
1Group effect (Kruskal-Wallis Test) – marked in bold the significant differences (after p-value correction).
Effect size: eta-squared interpretation is: < 0.06 (small effect), 0.06 - < 0.14 (moderate effect) and > = 0.14 (large effect).
2Time effect (Friedman’s Chi-Square Test) – marked in bold the significant differences (after p. value correction).
Effect size: Kendall’s W interpretation is: < 0.3 (small effect), 0.3 - < 0.5 (moderate effect) and > = 0.5 (large effect) M, Mean; Med, Median.
Special application mode: Youths’ body-esteem in the three groups over time
1Group effect (Kruskal-Wallis Test) – marked in bold the significant differences (after p-value correction).
Effect size: eta-squared interpretation is: < 0.06 (small effect), 0.06 - < 0.14 (moderate effect) and > = 0.14 (large effect).
2Time effect (Friedman’s Chi-Square Test) – marked in bold the significant differences (after p value correction).
Effect size: Kendall’s W interpretation is: < 0.3 (small effect), 0.3 - < 0.5 (moderate effect) and > = 0.5 (large effect).
M, Mean; Med, Median.
Fig. 5WhatsApp mode: Number of advertising strategies identified in each study arm over time