Engaging youth in mHealth: what works and how can we be sure?
Engaging youth in mHealth: what works and how can we be sure?
复制标题
DOI：
10.21037/mhealth-20-48
复制
发表时间：
2021-04-01
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Bauermeister, Jose A.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hightow-Weidman, Lisa B.;Horvath, Keith J.;Bauermeister, Jose A.
背景：参加移动健康(MHealth)干预试验的青年往往只是部分地、往往过早地完全停止使用这些技术[例如，应用程序(App)或移动优化网站]。有限的参与可能会影响干预对行为改变的影响，并损害研究人员的利益？有能力测试和评估其干预措施的真正效果。尽管mHealth干预措施已被证明是可行的，年轻人可以接受，但在不同的健康状况下，增加参与的战略研究得较少。具体地说，在艾滋病毒预防和护理mHealth干预措施中，对于哪些组成部分代表关键成分？没有达成共识。以支持青年最大限度地参与。此外，成功的干预评估需要系统跟踪用户的能力？参与干预组件(即ParaData)，以评估其对行为改变的影响。方法：作为青少年医学试验网络北卡罗来纳大学/埃默里创新技术(ITech)艾滋病毒/艾滋病干预组合的一部分，我们提出了在寻求促进青年参与的五个mHealth协议中使用的不同战略，通过ParaData跟踪和衡量参与，并将这些组成部分纳入mHealth干预评估。结果：我们使用iTech的案例研究描述了定义和衡量参与度的重要性，以说明不同的研究团队如何选择mHealth功能来随着时间的推移促进年轻人的参与度，同时考虑到技术设计中嵌入的特征、关键的变化机制和试验结果(例如，艾滋病毒检测、暴露前预防措施的吸收和坚持、艾滋病毒治疗的坚持)。最后，我们讨论了研究团队计划如何评估敬业度？S在他们干预结果中的作用？S。结论：在这一综述的基础上，我们讨论了在干预开发和设计过程中加强mHealth参与度的策略，确保在整个试验过程中监测和报告mHealth，并评估其对试验结果的影响。
Background: Youth participating in mobile health (mHealth) intervention trials often engage with the technologies [e.g., applications (app) or mobile-optimized websites] only partially, often prematurely discontinuing use altogether. Limited engagement can impact the interventions effect on behavior change and compromise researchers??? ability to test and estimate the true efficacy of their interventions. While mHealth interventions have been shown to be feasible and acceptable to youth, across diverse health conditions, strategies to increase engagement have been less well studied. Specifically, within HIV prevention and care mHealth interventions, there is not consensus as to which components represent the ???key ingredients??? to support maximal engagement of youth. Further, successful intervention evaluation requires the ability to systematically track users??? engagement with intervention components (i.e., paradata) to evaluate its effects on behavior change. Methods: As part of the Adolescent Medicine Trials Network UNC/Emory Center for Innovative Technology (iTech) portfolio of HIV/AIDS Interventions, we present diverse strategies used across five mHealth protocols seeking to promote youth engagement, track and measure engagement through paradata, and incorporate these components into mHealth intervention evaluations. Results: We describe the importance of defining and measuring engagement using case studies from iTech to illustrate how different research teams select mHealth features to promote youth engagement over time, taking into account features embedded in the technology design, key mechanisms of change and trial outcomes (e.g., HIV testing, pre-exposure prophylaxis uptake and adherence, HIV treatment adherence). Finally, we discuss how the research teams plan to evaluate engagement???s role on their intervention???s outcomes. Conclusions: Based on this synthesis, we discuss strategies to enhance mHealth engagement during intervention development and design, ensure its monitoring and reporting throughout the trial, and evaluate its impact on trial outcomes.