Background: A large number of people participate in individual or unorganized sports on a recreational level. Furthermore, many participants drop out because of injury or lowered motivation. Potentially, physical activity–related apps could motivate people during sport participation and help them to follow and maintain a healthy active lifestyle. It remains unclear what the quality of running, cycling, and walking apps is and how it can be assessed. Quality of these apps was defined as having a positive influence on participation in recreational sports. This information will show which features need to be assessed when rating physical activity–related app quality. Objective: The aim of this study was to identify expert perception on which features are important for the effectiveness of physical activity–related apps for participation in individual, recreational sports. Methods: Data were gathered via an expert panel approach using the nominal group technique. Two expert panels were organized to identify and rank app features relevant for sport participation. Experts were researchers or professionals in the field of industrial design and information technology (technology expert panel) and in the field of behavior change, health, and human movement sciences who had affinity with physical activity–related apps (health science expert panel). Of the 24 experts who were approached, 11 (46%) agreed to participate. Each panel session consisted of three consultation rounds. The 10 most important features per expert were collected. We calculated the frequency of the top 10 features and the mean importance score per feature (0-100). The sessions were taped and transcribed verbatim; a thematic analysis was conducted on the qualitative data. Results: In the technology expert panel, applied feedback and feedforward (91.3) and fun (91.3) were found most important (scale 0-100). Together with flexibility and look and feel, these features were mentioned most often (all n=4 [number of experts]; importance scores=41.3 and 43.8, respectively). The experts in the health science expert panels a and b found instructional feedback (95.0), motivating or challenging (95.0), peer rating and use (92.0), motivating feedback (91.3), and monitoring or statistics (91.0) most important. Most often ranked features were monitoring or statistics, motivating feedback, works good technically, tailoring starting point, fun, usability anticipating or context awareness, and privacy (all n=3-4 [number of experts]; importance scores=16.7-95.0). The qualitative analysis resulted in four overarching themes: (1) combination behavior change, technical, and design features needed; (2) extended feedback and tailoring is advised; (3) theoretical or evidence base as standard; and (4) entry requirements related to app use. Conclusions: The results show that a variety of features, including design, technical, and behavior change, are considered important for the effectiveness of physical activity–related apps by experts from different fields of expertise. These insights may assist in the development of an improved app rating scale.
LINK
Objectives: Participation is considerably restricted in children and adolescents with acquired brain injury (ABI) as compared to their healthy peers. This systematic review aims to identify which factors are associated with participation in children and adolescents with ABI. Methods: A systematic search in Medline and various other electronic databases from January 2001–November 2014 was performed. All clinical studies describing determinants of participation at least 1 year after the diagnosis of ABI by means of one or more pre-defined instruments in patients up to 18 years of age were included. Extracted data included study characteristics, patient characteristics, participation outcome and determinants of participation (categorized into: health conditions (including characteristics of ABI), body functions and structures, activities, personal factors and environmental factors). The methodological quality of the studies was evaluated based on three quality aspects (selection, information and statistical analysis bias) and scored as low, moderate or high. Results: Eight studies using an explicit participation outcome measure were selected after review, including a total of 1863 patients, with a follow-up ranging from 1 up to 288 months. Three studies included patients with a traumatic or a non-traumatic brain injury (TBI or NTBI) and five studies with only TBI patients. Factors consistently found to be associated with more participation restrictions were: greater severity of ABI, impaired motor, cognitive, behavioural and/or sensory functioning, limited accessibility of the physical environmentand worse family functioning. Fewer participation problems were associated with a supportive/nurturing parenting style, higher household income, acceptance and support in the community and availability of special programmes. The overall methodological quality of the included studies was high in two and moderate in six studies. Conclusion: This systematic review shows that only a few, moderate quality, studies on the determinants of participation after paediatric ABI using recommended explicit measurement instruments are available. Various components of the ICF model: health condition, body functions and structures and environmental factors were consistently found to be associated with participation. More methodologically sound studies, using the recommended explicit outcome measures, a standardized set of potential determinants and longterm follow-up are suggested to increase the knowledge on participation in children and youth with ABI.
Research question:As a result of the expansion of opportunities for leisure-time sport participation (LTSP), the question arises if differing organisational settings relate to differences in participation behaviour. This paper compares participation frequency and time spent on sport between club-organised and non-club-organised sport participants. Research methods:Data originate from the 2009 Household Study on Sport Participation in Flanders (Belgium). The sample consists of 4020 sports participants that are parents of school-aged children. The frequency of LTSP, time per training session and total time spent on sport per week are constructed as dependent variables for log-linear regression analyses. The organisational setting for LTSP is the main independent variable. Analyses are conducted at a total sample level and a sport-specific level. Results and findings:Participation frequency and time spent on sport increase when participants engage with club-organised sport. The association between the organisational setting for LTSP and the dependent variable varies as a function of different variables related to participation in a specific sport. Implications:As a contribution to ongoing debates on the promotion of LTSP in different organisational settings, results of this study allow for discussing the popularity of non-club-organised sport in relation to advantages of club-organised sport. For managers in sport organisations, it is important to gain insight in participation behaviour of (potential) participants to develop targeted strategies. Results are also relevant to policy-makers in order to adequately allocate resources aimed at increasing participation rates and time spent on sport among a broader range of the population.
LINK
