Behavioral Engagement and Activation Model Study (BEAMS): A latent class analysis of adopters and non-adopters of digital health technologies among people with Type 2 diabetes.
John D Piette, Keni C S Lee, Hayden B Bosworth, Diana Isaacs, Christian J Cerrada, Raghu Kainkaryam, Jan Liska, Felix Lee, Adee Kennedy, David Kerr
{"title":"Behavioral Engagement and Activation Model Study (BEAMS): A latent class analysis of adopters and non-adopters of digital health technologies among people with Type 2 diabetes.","authors":"John D Piette, Keni C S Lee, Hayden B Bosworth, Diana Isaacs, Christian J Cerrada, Raghu Kainkaryam, Jan Liska, Felix Lee, Adee Kennedy, David Kerr","doi":"10.1093/tbm/ibae034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Many people with Type 2 diabetes (T2D) who could benefit from digital health technologies (DHTs) are either not using DHTs or do use them, but not for long enough to reach their behavioral or metabolic goals. We aimed to identify subgroups within DHT adopters and non-adopters and describe their unique profiles to better understand the type of tailored support needed to promote effective and sustained DHT use across a diverse T2D population. We conducted latent class analysis of a sample of adults with T2D who responded to an internet survey between December 2021 and March 2022. We describe the clinical and psychological characteristics of DHT adopters and non-adopters, and their attitudes toward DHTs. A total of 633 individuals were characterized as either DHT \"Adopters\" (n = 376 reporting any use of DHT) or \"Non-Adopters\" (n = 257 reporting never using any DHT). Within Adopters, three subgroups were identified: 21% (79/376) were \"Self-managing Adopters,\" who reported high health activation and self-efficacy for diabetes management, 42% (158/376) were \"Activated Adopters with dropout risk,\" and 37% (139/376) were \"Non-Activated Adopters with dropout risk.\" The latter two subgroups reported barriers to using DHTs and lower rates of intended future use. Within Non-Adopters, two subgroups were identified: 31% (79/257) were \"Activated Non-Adopters,\" and 69% (178/257) were \"Non-Adopters with barriers,\" and were similarly distinguished by health activation and barriers to using DHTs. Beyond demographic characteristics, psychological, and clinical factors may help identify different subgroups of Adopters and Non-Adopters.</p>","PeriodicalId":48679,"journal":{"name":"Translational Behavioral Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"491-498"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11282572/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Translational Behavioral Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibae034","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Many people with Type 2 diabetes (T2D) who could benefit from digital health technologies (DHTs) are either not using DHTs or do use them, but not for long enough to reach their behavioral or metabolic goals. We aimed to identify subgroups within DHT adopters and non-adopters and describe their unique profiles to better understand the type of tailored support needed to promote effective and sustained DHT use across a diverse T2D population. We conducted latent class analysis of a sample of adults with T2D who responded to an internet survey between December 2021 and March 2022. We describe the clinical and psychological characteristics of DHT adopters and non-adopters, and their attitudes toward DHTs. A total of 633 individuals were characterized as either DHT "Adopters" (n = 376 reporting any use of DHT) or "Non-Adopters" (n = 257 reporting never using any DHT). Within Adopters, three subgroups were identified: 21% (79/376) were "Self-managing Adopters," who reported high health activation and self-efficacy for diabetes management, 42% (158/376) were "Activated Adopters with dropout risk," and 37% (139/376) were "Non-Activated Adopters with dropout risk." The latter two subgroups reported barriers to using DHTs and lower rates of intended future use. Within Non-Adopters, two subgroups were identified: 31% (79/257) were "Activated Non-Adopters," and 69% (178/257) were "Non-Adopters with barriers," and were similarly distinguished by health activation and barriers to using DHTs. Beyond demographic characteristics, psychological, and clinical factors may help identify different subgroups of Adopters and Non-Adopters.
期刊介绍:
Translational Behavioral Medicine publishes content that engages, informs, and catalyzes dialogue about behavioral medicine among the research, practice, and policy communities. TBM began receiving an Impact Factor in 2015 and currently holds an Impact Factor of 2.989.
TBM is one of two journals published by the Society of Behavioral Medicine. The Society of Behavioral Medicine is a multidisciplinary organization of clinicians, educators, and scientists dedicated to promoting the study of the interactions of behavior with biology and the environment, and then applying that knowledge to improve the health and well-being of individuals, families, communities, and populations.