2010
DOI: 10.2196/jmir.1430
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Engagement and Retention: Measuring Breadth and Depth of Participant Use of an Online Intervention

Abstract: BackgroundThe Internet provides us with tools (user metrics or paradata) to evaluate how users interact with online interventions. Analysis of these paradata can lead to design improvements.ObjectiveThe objective was to explore the qualities of online participant engagement in an online intervention. We analyzed the paradata in a randomized controlled trial of alternative versions of an online intervention designed to promote consumption of fruit and vegetables.MethodsVolunteers were randomized to 1 of 3 study… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

16
222
1
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 215 publications
(240 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
16
222
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…As participants in the PAL scheme had complete freedom to choose how they used the website, a higher frequency of hits on a particular website component across the days on which the participant 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 chose to log on was expected to reflect a higher level of interest (and willingness to engage) in that aspect of the intervention. This was also in line with previous studies of engagement in web-based interventions using log-in frequency as a measure of engagement [26, [28][29][30][31][32].…”
Section: Engagement Variablessupporting
confidence: 91%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…As participants in the PAL scheme had complete freedom to choose how they used the website, a higher frequency of hits on a particular website component across the days on which the participant 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 chose to log on was expected to reflect a higher level of interest (and willingness to engage) in that aspect of the intervention. This was also in line with previous studies of engagement in web-based interventions using log-in frequency as a measure of engagement [26, [28][29][30][31][32].…”
Section: Engagement Variablessupporting
confidence: 91%
“…using the PA monitoring system to record PA, accessing the study website) were not related to PA at six months in contrast to the findings of several previous studies [9,57]. One plausible explanation is that our indicators may not have sufficiently [13,14,27,30,31]. Furthermore, the website was a mode of intervention delivery for the PAL study (the main intervention components were the financial incentive; placing sensors in outdoor environment; self-monitoring).…”
Section: Intervention Engagement and Physical Activitycontrasting
confidence: 83%
“…As in other online intervention studies, there is considerable variability within our sample for how frequently the Web site was used. [25][26][27][28][29] Little is known about the most appropriate mix of features and their level of use as predictors of the effectiveness of online interventions, so there is much to learn from studies such as this one. Additional analyses related to patterns of engagement in the pregnancy intervention for appropriate gestational weight gain are underway.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Research of engagement appears to be in its early days, with little consensus on what engagement is, what leads to a patient being perceived as engaged or disengaged or indeed, how engagement occurs. The term engagement is used in multiple ways in the literature, variably referring to patient actions and behaviors such as accessing services [6], retention within services [7,8], enthusiasm [2] and self-management of health conditions [8], or referred to a hospital's provision of health resources and social media usage [9], and to the interaction between the patient and healthcare provider [10].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%