Optimising Web-Based Computer-Tailored Physical Activity Interventions for Prostate Cancer Survivors: A Randomised Controlled Trial Examining the Impact of Website Architecture on User Engagement

Amy Finlay, Holly Evans, Andrew Vincent, Gary Wittert, Corneel Vandelanotte and Camille E Short
Additional contact information
Amy Finlay: The Freemasons Foundation Centre for Men’s Health, School of Medicine, University of Adelaide, Adelaide 5000, SA, Australia
Holly Evans: The Freemasons Foundation Centre for Men’s Health, School of Medicine, University of Adelaide, Adelaide 5000, SA, Australia
Andrew Vincent: The Freemasons Foundation Centre for Men’s Health, School of Medicine, University of Adelaide, Adelaide 5000, SA, Australia
Gary Wittert: The Freemasons Foundation Centre for Men’s Health, School of Medicine, University of Adelaide, Adelaide 5000, SA, Australia
Corneel Vandelanotte: Physical Activity Research Group, Appleton Institute, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton 4701, QLD, Australia
Camille E Short: The Freemasons Foundation Centre for Men’s Health, School of Medicine, University of Adelaide, Adelaide 5000, SA, Australia

IJERPH, 2020, vol. 17, issue 21, 1-21

Abstract: Background: Web-based computer-tailored interventions can assist prostate cancer survivors to become more physically active by providing personally relevant behaviour change support. This study aimed to explore how changing the website architecture (free choice vs. tunnelled) impacted engagement within a physical activity computer-tailored intervention targeting prostate cancer survivors. Methods: On a 2:2:1 ratio, 71 Australian prostate cancer survivors with local or locally advanced disease (mean age: 66.6 years ± 9.66) were randomised into either a free-choice (N = 27), tunnelled (N = 27) or minimal intervention control arm (N =17). The primary outcome was differences in usage of the physical activity self-monitoring and feedback modules between the two intervention arms. Differences in usage of other website components between the two intervention groups were explored as secondary outcomes. Further, secondary outcomes involving comparisons between all study groups (including the control) included usability, personal relevance, and behaviour change. Results: The average number of physical activity self-monitoring and feedback modules accessed was higher in the tunnelled arm (M 2.6 SD 1.3) compared to the free-choice arm (M 1.5 SD 1.4), p = 0.01. However, free-choice participants were significantly more likely to have engaged with the social support ( p = 0.008) and habit formation ( p = 0.003) ‘once-off’ modules compared to the standard tunnelled arm. There were no other between-group differences found for any other study outcomes. Conclusion: This study indicated that website architecture influences behavioural engagement. Further research is needed to examine the impact of differential usage on mechanisms of action and behaviour change.

Keywords: computer tailoring; e-health; cancer survivorship; user engagement; physical activity; behaviour change; website architecture (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/21/7920/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/21/7920/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:21:p:7920-:d:436306

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().