| Title |
Comparing motivational, self-regulatory and habitual processes in a computer-tailored physical activity intervention in hospital employees - protocol for the PATHS randomised controlled trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12889-017-4415-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dominika Kwasnicka, Corneel Vandelanotte, Amanda Rebar, Benjamin Gardner, Camille Short, Mitch Duncan, Dawn Crook, Martin S. Hagger |
| Abstract |
Most people do not engage in sufficient physical activity to confer health benefits and to reduce risk of chronic disease. Healthcare professionals frequently provide guidance on physical activity, but often do not meet guideline levels of physical activity themselves. The main objective of this study is to develop and test the efficacy of a tailored intervention to increase healthcare professionals' physical activity participation and quality of life, and to reduce work-related stress and absenteeism. This is the first study to compare the additive effects of three forms of a tailored intervention using different techniques from behavioural theory, which differ according to their focus on motivational, self-regulatory and/or habitual processes. Healthcare professionals (N = 192) will be recruited from four hospitals in Perth, Western Australia, via email lists, leaflets, and posters to participate in the four group randomised controlled trial. Participants will be randomised to one of four conditions: (1) education only (non-tailored information only), (2) education plus intervention components to enhance motivation, (3) education plus components to enhance motivation and self-regulation, and (4) education plus components to enhance motivation, self-regulation and habit formation. All intervention groups will receive a computer-tailored intervention administered via a web-based platform and will receive supporting text-messages containing tailored information, prompts and feedback relevant to each condition. All outcomes will be assessed at baseline, and at 3-month follow-up. The primary outcome assessed in this study is physical activity measured using activity monitors. Secondary outcomes include: quality of life, stress, anxiety, sleep, and absenteeism. Website engagement, retention, preferences and intervention fidelity will also be evaluated as well as potential mediators and moderators of intervention effect. This is the first study to examine a tailored, technology-supported intervention aiming to increase physical activity in healthcare professionals. The study will evaluate whether including additional theory-based behaviour change techniques aimed at promoting motivation, self-regulation and habit will lead to increased physical activity participation relative to information alone. The online platform developed in this study has potential to deliver efficient, scalable and personally-relevant intervention that can be translated to other occupational settings. Australian New-Zealand Clinical Trial Registry: ACTRN12616000462482, submitted 29/03/2016, prospectively registered 8/04/2016. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 5 | 38% |
| Finland | 1 | 8% |
| Canada | 1 | 8% |
| Isle of Man | 1 | 8% |
| United States | 1 | 8% |
| Ireland | 1 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 2 | 15% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 46% |
| Scientists | 6 | 46% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 286 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 286 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 54 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 34 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 24 | 8% |
| Researcher | 23 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 19 | 7% |
| Other | 42 | 15% |
| Unknown | 90 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 49 | 17% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 35 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 32 | 11% |
| Sports and Recreations | 17 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 9 | 3% |
| Other | 38 | 13% |
| Unknown | 106 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 January 2019.
All research outputs
#4,898,079
of 24,498,639 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#5,462
of 16,189 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,296
of 317,643 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#100
of 260 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,498,639 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,189 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,643 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 260 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.