优化 "少喝一点 "应用程序中对饮酒风险水平上升和上升人群饮酒背景信息的测量:混合方法可用性研究。

IF 2 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES JMIR Formative Research Pub Date : 2024-10-24 DOI:10.2196/50131
Abigail K Stevely, Claire Garnett, John Holmes, Andrew Jones, Larisa Dinu, Melissa Oldham
{"title":"优化 \"少喝一点 \"应用程序中对饮酒风险水平上升和上升人群饮酒背景信息的测量:混合方法可用性研究。","authors":"Abigail K Stevely, Claire Garnett, John Holmes, Andrew Jones, Larisa Dinu, Melissa Oldham","doi":"10.2196/50131","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is a growing public health evidence base focused on understanding the links between drinking contexts and alcohol consumption. However, the potential value of developing context-based interventions to help people drinking at increasing and higher risk levels to cut down remains underexplored. Digital interventions, such as apps, offer significant potential for delivering context-based interventions as they can collect contextual information and flexibly deliver personalized interventions while addressing barriers associated with face-to-face interventions, such as time constraints.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This early phase study aimed to identify the best method for collecting information on the contexts of alcohol consumption among users of an alcohol reduction app by comparing 2 alternative drinking diaries in terms of user engagement, data quality, usability, and acceptability.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants were recruited using the online platform Prolific and were randomly assigned to use 1 of the 2 adapted versions of the Drink Less app for 14 days. Tags (n=31) included tags for location, motivation, and company that participants added to drink records. Occasion type (n=31) included a list of occasion types that participants selected from when adding drink records. We assessed engagement and data quality with app data, usability with a validated questionnaire, and acceptability with semistructured interviews.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Quantitative findings on engagement, data quality, and app usability were good overall, with participants using the app on most days (tags: mean 12.23, SD 2.46 days; occasion type: mean 12.39, SD 2.12 days). However, around 40% of drinking records in tags did not include company and motivation tags. Mean usability scores were similar across app versions (tags: mean 72.39, SD 8.10; occasion type: mean 74.23, SD 6.76). Qualitative analysis found that both versions were acceptable to users and were relevant to their drinking occasions, and participants reported increased awareness of their drinking contexts. Several participants reported that the diary helped them to reduce alcohol consumption in some contexts (eg, home or lone drinking) more than others (eg, social drinking) and suggested that they felt less negative affect recording social drinking contexts out of their home. Participants also suggested the inclusion of \"work drinks\" in both versions and \"habit\" as a motivation in the tags version.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There was no clearly better method for collecting data on alcohol consumption as both methods had good user engagement, usability, acceptability, and data quality. Participants recorded sufficient data on their drinking contexts to suggest that an adapted version of Drink Less could be used as the basis for context-specific interventions. The occasion type version may be preferable owing to lower participant burden. A more general consideration is to ensure that context-specific interventions are designed to minimize the risk of unintended positive reinforcement of drinking occasions that are seen as sociable by users.</p>","PeriodicalId":14841,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Formative Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11544327/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Optimizing the Measurement of Information on the Context of Alcohol Consumption Within the Drink Less App Among People Drinking at Increasing and Higher Risk Levels: Mixed-Methods Usability Study.\",\"authors\":\"Abigail K Stevely, Claire Garnett, John Holmes, Andrew Jones, Larisa Dinu, Melissa Oldham\",\"doi\":\"10.2196/50131\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is a growing public health evidence base focused on understanding the links between drinking contexts and alcohol consumption. However, the potential value of developing context-based interventions to help people drinking at increasing and higher risk levels to cut down remains underexplored. Digital interventions, such as apps, offer significant potential for delivering context-based interventions as they can collect contextual information and flexibly deliver personalized interventions while addressing barriers associated with face-to-face interventions, such as time constraints.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This early phase study aimed to identify the best method for collecting information on the contexts of alcohol consumption among users of an alcohol reduction app by comparing 2 alternative drinking diaries in terms of user engagement, data quality, usability, and acceptability.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants were recruited using the online platform Prolific and were randomly assigned to use 1 of the 2 adapted versions of the Drink Less app for 14 days. Tags (n=31) included tags for location, motivation, and company that participants added to drink records. Occasion type (n=31) included a list of occasion types that participants selected from when adding drink records. We assessed engagement and data quality with app data, usability with a validated questionnaire, and acceptability with semistructured interviews.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Quantitative findings on engagement, data quality, and app usability were good overall, with participants using the app on most days (tags: mean 12.23, SD 2.46 days; occasion type: mean 12.39, SD 2.12 days). However, around 40% of drinking records in tags did not include company and motivation tags. Mean usability scores were similar across app versions (tags: mean 72.39, SD 8.10; occasion type: mean 74.23, SD 6.76). Qualitative analysis found that both versions were acceptable to users and were relevant to their drinking occasions, and participants reported increased awareness of their drinking contexts. Several participants reported that the diary helped them to reduce alcohol consumption in some contexts (eg, home or lone drinking) more than others (eg, social drinking) and suggested that they felt less negative affect recording social drinking contexts out of their home. Participants also suggested the inclusion of \\\"work drinks\\\" in both versions and \\\"habit\\\" as a motivation in the tags version.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There was no clearly better method for collecting data on alcohol consumption as both methods had good user engagement, usability, acceptability, and data quality. Participants recorded sufficient data on their drinking contexts to suggest that an adapted version of Drink Less could be used as the basis for context-specific interventions. The occasion type version may be preferable owing to lower participant burden. A more general consideration is to ensure that context-specific interventions are designed to minimize the risk of unintended positive reinforcement of drinking occasions that are seen as sociable by users.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14841,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JMIR Formative Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11544327/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JMIR Formative Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2196/50131\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Formative Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/50131","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:越来越多的公共卫生证据都集中在了解饮酒环境与酒精消费之间的联系上。然而,开发基于情境的干预措施,帮助饮酒风险不断增加或更高的人群减少饮酒量,其潜在价值仍未得到充分挖掘。数字干预(如应用程序)为提供基于情境的干预提供了巨大的潜力,因为它们可以收集情境信息,灵活提供个性化干预,同时解决与面对面干预相关的障碍,如时间限制:这项早期阶段的研究旨在通过比较两种可供选择的饮酒日记在用户参与度、数据质量、可用性和可接受性等方面的表现,确定收集减酒应用程序用户饮酒情境信息的最佳方法:通过在线平台 Prolific 招募参与者,并随机分配他们在 14 天内使用 2 种不同版本的 "少饮 "应用程序中的一种。标签(n=31)包括参与者添加到饮酒记录中的地点、动机和公司标签。场合类型(n=31)包括参与者在添加饮酒记录时选择的场合类型列表。我们通过应用程序数据评估参与度和数据质量,通过验证问卷评估可用性,通过半结构式访谈评估可接受性:关于参与度、数据质量和应用程序可用性的定量研究结果总体良好,参与者在大多数日子里都会使用应用程序(标签:平均 12.23 天,标准差 2.46 天;场合类型:平均 12.39 天,标准差 2.12 天)。不过,标签中约有 40% 的饮酒记录不包括公司和动机标签。各版本应用程序的平均可用性得分相似(标签:平均 72.39 分,标准差 8.10 分;场合类型:平均 74.23 分,标准差 6.76 分)。定性分析发现,两个版本都能被用户接受,并且与他们的饮酒场合相关,参与者表示对自己饮酒环境的认识有所提高。一些参与者表示,与其他场合(如社交饮酒)相比,日记更有助于他们减少某些场合(如在家或独自饮酒)的饮酒量,并表示他们在记录家庭以外的社交饮酒场合时感受到的负面影响较少。参与者还建议在两个版本中都加入 "工作饮酒",在标签版本中加入 "习惯 "作为动机:结论:两种方法在用户参与度、可用性、可接受性和数据质量方面都很好,因此在收集饮酒数据方面没有明显更好的方法。参与者记录了足够多的饮酒环境数据,这表明经过改编的 "少喝一点 "可以作为针对特定环境的干预措施的基础。由于参与者的负担较轻,场合类型版本可能更可取。一个更普遍的考虑是,要确保在设计针对特定情境的干预措施时,尽量减少对使用者认为是社交场合的饮酒场合进行意外正强化的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Optimizing the Measurement of Information on the Context of Alcohol Consumption Within the Drink Less App Among People Drinking at Increasing and Higher Risk Levels: Mixed-Methods Usability Study.

Background: There is a growing public health evidence base focused on understanding the links between drinking contexts and alcohol consumption. However, the potential value of developing context-based interventions to help people drinking at increasing and higher risk levels to cut down remains underexplored. Digital interventions, such as apps, offer significant potential for delivering context-based interventions as they can collect contextual information and flexibly deliver personalized interventions while addressing barriers associated with face-to-face interventions, such as time constraints.

Objective: This early phase study aimed to identify the best method for collecting information on the contexts of alcohol consumption among users of an alcohol reduction app by comparing 2 alternative drinking diaries in terms of user engagement, data quality, usability, and acceptability.

Methods: Participants were recruited using the online platform Prolific and were randomly assigned to use 1 of the 2 adapted versions of the Drink Less app for 14 days. Tags (n=31) included tags for location, motivation, and company that participants added to drink records. Occasion type (n=31) included a list of occasion types that participants selected from when adding drink records. We assessed engagement and data quality with app data, usability with a validated questionnaire, and acceptability with semistructured interviews.

Results: Quantitative findings on engagement, data quality, and app usability were good overall, with participants using the app on most days (tags: mean 12.23, SD 2.46 days; occasion type: mean 12.39, SD 2.12 days). However, around 40% of drinking records in tags did not include company and motivation tags. Mean usability scores were similar across app versions (tags: mean 72.39, SD 8.10; occasion type: mean 74.23, SD 6.76). Qualitative analysis found that both versions were acceptable to users and were relevant to their drinking occasions, and participants reported increased awareness of their drinking contexts. Several participants reported that the diary helped them to reduce alcohol consumption in some contexts (eg, home or lone drinking) more than others (eg, social drinking) and suggested that they felt less negative affect recording social drinking contexts out of their home. Participants also suggested the inclusion of "work drinks" in both versions and "habit" as a motivation in the tags version.

Conclusions: There was no clearly better method for collecting data on alcohol consumption as both methods had good user engagement, usability, acceptability, and data quality. Participants recorded sufficient data on their drinking contexts to suggest that an adapted version of Drink Less could be used as the basis for context-specific interventions. The occasion type version may be preferable owing to lower participant burden. A more general consideration is to ensure that context-specific interventions are designed to minimize the risk of unintended positive reinforcement of drinking occasions that are seen as sociable by users.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
JMIR Formative Research
JMIR Formative Research Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
9.10%
发文量
579
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
The Feasibility of AgileNudge+ Software to Facilitate Positive Behavioral Change: Mixed Methods Design. A Web-Based Intervention to Support a Growth Mindset and Well-Being in Unemployed Young Adults: Development Study. Assessing the Feasibility and Acceptability of Virtual Reality for Remote Group-Mediated Physical Activity in Older Adults: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial. Associations Among Cardiometabolic Risk Factors, Sleep Duration, and Obstructive Sleep Apnea in a Southeastern US Rural Community: Cross-Sectional Analysis From the SLUMBRx-PONS Study. Barriers, Facilitators, and Requirements for a Telerehabilitation Aftercare Program for Patients After Occupational Injuries: Semistructured Interviews With Key Stakeholders.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1