Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

Adaptive goal setting and financial incentives: a 2x2 factorial randomized controlled trial to increase adults' physical activity
Adams MA, Hurley JC, Todd M, Bhuiyan N, Jarrett CL, Tucker WJ, Hollingshead KE, Angadi SS
BMC Public Health 2017 Mar 29;17(286):Epub
clinical trial
7/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: No; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: Yes; Adequate follow-up: Yes; Intention-to-treat analysis: Yes; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed*

BACKGROUND: Emerging interventions that rely on and harness variability in behavior to adapt to individual performance over time may outperform interventions that prescribe static goals (eg, 10,000 steps/day). The purpose of this factorial trial was to compare adaptive versus static goal setting and immediate versus delayed, non-contingent financial rewards for increasing free-living physical activity (PA). METHODS: A 4-month 2x2 factorial randomized controlled trial tested main effects for goal setting (adaptive versus static goals) and rewards (immediate versus delayed) and interactions between factors to increase steps/day as measured by a Fitbit Zip. Moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) minutes/day was examined as a secondary outcome. RESULTS: Participants (n = 96) were mainly female (77%), aged 41 +/- 9.5 years, and all were insufficiently active and overweight/obese (mean BMI 34.1 +/- 6.2). Participants across all groups increased by 2,389 steps/day on average from baseline to intervention phase (p < 0.001). Participants receiving static goals showed a stronger increase in steps per day from baseline phase to intervention phase (2,630 steps/day) than those receiving adaptive goals (2,149 steps/day; difference 482 steps/day, p = 0.095). Participants receiving immediate rewards showed stronger improvement (2,762 step/day increase) from baseline to intervention phase than those receiving delayed rewards (2,016 steps/day increase; difference 746 steps/day, p = 0.009). However, the adaptive goals group showed a slower decrease in steps/day from the beginning of the intervention phase to the end of the intervention phase (ie, less than half the rate) compared to the static goals group (-7.7 steps versus -18.3 steps each day; difference 10.7 steps/day, p < 0.001) resulting in better improvements for the adaptive goals group by study end. Rate of change over the intervention phase did not differ between reward groups. Significant goal phase x goal setting x reward interactions were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Adaptive goals outperformed static goals (ie, 10,000 steps) over a 4-month period. Small immediate rewards outperformed larger, delayed rewards. Adaptive goals with either immediate or delayed rewards should be preferred for promoting PA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT02053259 registered prospectively on January 31, 2014.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help