Evaluation of Digital Interventions for Physical Activity Promotion: Protocol for a Scoping Review.
digital health
digital intervention
evaluation
physical activity promotion
scoping review
Journal
JMIR research protocols
ISSN: 1929-0748
Titre abrégé: JMIR Res Protoc
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101599504
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 Mar 2022
03 Mar 2022
Historique:
received:
01
12
2021
accepted:
03
02
2022
revised:
12
01
2022
entrez:
3
3
2022
pubmed:
4
3
2022
medline:
4
3
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Digital interventions (DIs) could support physical activity (PA) promotion, according to recent reviews. However, it remains unclear if and how DIs for PA promotion are evaluated; thus, it is unclear if they support behavior change in real-world settings. A mapping of evidence from published reviews is required to focus on the evaluation of DIs for PA promotion. The aim of our study is to investigate evaluation strategies for any outcome in the context of DIs for PA promotion by conducting a scoping review of published reviews. Our scoping review adheres to the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. The information sources include bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL) and the bibliographies of the selected studies. The electronic search strategy was developed and conducted in collaboration with an experienced database specialist. The electronic search was conducted in English with no limits up to March 19, 2021, for sources with the terms digital intervention AND evaluation AND physical activity in titles or abstracts. After deduplication, 300 reviews selected from 4912 search results were assessed for eligibility by 2 authors working independently. The inclusion criteria were (1) healthy or clinical samples (population), (2) DIs for PA promotion (intervention), (3) comparisons to any other intervention or no intervention (comparison), (4) evaluation strategies (methods, results, or frameworks) for any outcome in the context of DIs for PA promotion (outcome), and (5) any published review (study type). According to the consensus reached during a discussion, 40 reviews met the inclusion criteria-36 from the electronic search and 4 from the manual search of the bibliographies of the 36 reviews. All reviews reported the evaluation strategies for any outcomes in the context of DIs for PA promotion in healthy or clinical samples. Data coding and the quality appraisal of systematic reviews are currently being performed independently by 2 authors. Our scoping review includes data from 40 published reviews (1 rapid review, 9 scoping reviews, and 30 systematic reviews). The focus of data coding is on evaluation strategies in the context of DIs for PA promotion and on the critical appraisal of the included systematic reviews. The final consensus regarding all data is expected in early 2022. Interventions for PA promotion that are supported by digital technologies require evaluation to ensure their efficacy in real-world settings. Our scoping review is needed because it addresses novel objectives that focus on such evaluations and are not answered in the published reviews identified in our search. The evaluation strategies addressing DIs for PA promotion will be mapped to synthesize the results that have been reported in published reviews so far. DERR1-10.2196/35332.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Digital interventions (DIs) could support physical activity (PA) promotion, according to recent reviews. However, it remains unclear if and how DIs for PA promotion are evaluated; thus, it is unclear if they support behavior change in real-world settings. A mapping of evidence from published reviews is required to focus on the evaluation of DIs for PA promotion.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
The aim of our study is to investigate evaluation strategies for any outcome in the context of DIs for PA promotion by conducting a scoping review of published reviews.
METHODS
METHODS
Our scoping review adheres to the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. The information sources include bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL) and the bibliographies of the selected studies. The electronic search strategy was developed and conducted in collaboration with an experienced database specialist. The electronic search was conducted in English with no limits up to March 19, 2021, for sources with the terms digital intervention AND evaluation AND physical activity in titles or abstracts. After deduplication, 300 reviews selected from 4912 search results were assessed for eligibility by 2 authors working independently. The inclusion criteria were (1) healthy or clinical samples (population), (2) DIs for PA promotion (intervention), (3) comparisons to any other intervention or no intervention (comparison), (4) evaluation strategies (methods, results, or frameworks) for any outcome in the context of DIs for PA promotion (outcome), and (5) any published review (study type). According to the consensus reached during a discussion, 40 reviews met the inclusion criteria-36 from the electronic search and 4 from the manual search of the bibliographies of the 36 reviews. All reviews reported the evaluation strategies for any outcomes in the context of DIs for PA promotion in healthy or clinical samples. Data coding and the quality appraisal of systematic reviews are currently being performed independently by 2 authors.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Our scoping review includes data from 40 published reviews (1 rapid review, 9 scoping reviews, and 30 systematic reviews). The focus of data coding is on evaluation strategies in the context of DIs for PA promotion and on the critical appraisal of the included systematic reviews. The final consensus regarding all data is expected in early 2022.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Interventions for PA promotion that are supported by digital technologies require evaluation to ensure their efficacy in real-world settings. Our scoping review is needed because it addresses novel objectives that focus on such evaluations and are not answered in the published reviews identified in our search. The evaluation strategies addressing DIs for PA promotion will be mapped to synthesize the results that have been reported in published reviews so far.
INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)
UNASSIGNED
DERR1-10.2196/35332.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35238321
pii: v11i3e35332
doi: 10.2196/35332
pmc: PMC8931641
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e35332Informations de copyright
©Karina Karolina De Santis, Tina Jahnel, Lea Mergenthal, Hajo Zeeb, Katja Matthias. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (https://www.researchprotocols.org), 03.03.2022.
Références
BMC Public Health. 2020 Jun 26;20(1):1000
pubmed: 32586301
Lancet Digit Health. 2019 Jun;1(2):e52-e54
pubmed: 33323229
Br J Sports Med. 2021 Apr;55(8):422-432
pubmed: 33355160
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019 Dec 13;7(12):e13311
pubmed: 31833836
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2021 Nov 22;7(11):e32951
pubmed: 34813493
Curr Epidemiol Rep. 2020 Mar;7(1):25-38
pubmed: 33365227
Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz. 2020 Feb;63(2):137-144
pubmed: 31919531
Health Promot J Austr. 2016 Feb;27(3):187-197
pubmed: 27719734
Complement Ther Med. 2019 Oct;46:144-152
pubmed: 31519271
Ann Intern Med. 2018 Oct 2;169(7):467-473
pubmed: 30178033
Am J Health Promot. 2020 May;34(4):418-430
pubmed: 31858812
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Mar 27;17(7):
pubmed: 32230769
PLoS One. 2020 Aug 13;15(8):e0237585
pubmed: 32790752
Games Health J. 2015 Dec;4(6):460-9
pubmed: 26397179
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2018 Jan;34(5):464-475
pubmed: 30201060
NPJ Digit Med. 2019 May 13;2:38
pubmed: 31304384
BMJ. 2017 Sep 21;358:j4008
pubmed: 28935701
Res Synth Methods. 2022 Jul;13(4):424-433
pubmed: 34664766
J Clin Epidemiol. 2019 Oct;114:133-140
pubmed: 31152864
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2021 Jan 18;9(1):e16282
pubmed: 33459598
Front Med (Lausanne). 2021 Jul 08;8:647897
pubmed: 34307394
Heliyon. 2020 Sep 01;6(9):e04776
pubmed: 32939412