Search

Background: To explore continuities and changes in gambling behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic and the factors that influenced these among a sample of regular sports bettors. Methods: A longitudinal qualitative study using in-depth interviews. Sixteen sports bettors living in Britain took part in the first interviews in July-November 2020, and 13 in the follow-up interviews in March-September 2021. Results: Individual patterns of gambling were episodic: it was common for gambling to increase during some periods of the pandemic and to decrease during others, reflecting the dynamic and (often) challenging circumstances which people were living through at the time. Changes and continuities in gambling during the pandemic were influenced by a range of factors which we have grouped into two main themes relating to 'gambling and the sports landscape' and 'disruption to day-to-day life'. It was common for a constellation of factors to influence gambling behaviour rather than a single factor. These constellations of factors varied from person to person and at different times during the pandemic. Conclusions: Findings of the present study are consistent with earlier literature examining gambling careers before the advent of COVID-19 showing that gambling trajectories are non-linear. Our research suggests that 'typical' patterns of gambling behaviour (e.g. being episodic), and the broader known risk and protective factors within individuals, families, communities and societies have been amplified during the pandemic. Findings highlight the adaptability of the gambling industry to continue to reach consumers through product offerings and marketing even in a period of unprecedented restrictions on supply, and show the potential resulting harms of these actions among gamblers at risk of experiencing gambling problems. Taken together, findings from this study provide important new insights relevant to discussions about gambling regulation, and support calls for multifaceted and comprehensive policy, regulatory, and treatment approaches, to minimise gambling-related harms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundAlthough many smartphone apps and wearables have been designed to improve physical activity, their rapidly evolving nature and complexity present challenges for evaluating their impact. Traditional methodologies, such as randomized controlled trials (RCTs), can be slow. To keep pace with rapid technological development, evaluations of mobile health technologies must be efficient. Rapid alternative research designs have been proposed, and efficient in-app data collection methods, including in-device sensors and device-generated logs, are available. Along with effectiveness, it is important to measure engagement (ie, users’ interaction and usage behavior) and acceptability (ie, users’ subjective perceptions and experiences) to help explain how and why apps and wearables work. ObjectivesThis study aimed to (1) explore the extent to which evaluations of physical activity apps and wearables: employ rapid research designs; assess engagement, acceptability, as well as effectiveness; use efficient data collection methods; and (2) describe which dimensions of engagement and acceptability are assessed. MethodAn interdisciplinary scoping review using 8 databases from health and computing sciences. Included studies measured physical activity, and evaluated physical activity apps or wearables that provided sensor-based feedback. Results were analyzed using descriptive numerical summaries, chi-square testing, and qualitative thematic analysis. ResultsA total of 1829 abstracts were screened, and 858 articles read in full. Of 111 included studies, 61 (55.0%) were published between 2015 and 2017. Most (55.0%, 61/111) were RCTs, and only 2 studies (1.8%) used rapid research designs: 1 single-case design and 1 multiphase optimization strategy. Other research designs included 23 (22.5%) repeated measures designs, 11 (9.9%) nonrandomized group designs, 10 (9.0%) case studies, and 4 (3.6%) observational studies. Less than one-third of the studies (32.0%, 35/111) investigated effectiveness, engagement, and acceptability together. To measure physical activity, most studies (90.1%, 101/111) employed sensors (either in-device [67.6%, 75/111] or external [23.4%, 26/111]). RCTs were more likely to employ external sensors (accelerometers: P=.005). Studies that assessed engagement (52.3%, 58/111) mostly used device-generated logs (91%, 53/58) to measure the frequency, depth, and length of engagement. Studies that assessed acceptability (57.7%, 64/111) most often used questionnaires (64%, 42/64) and/or qualitative methods (53%, 34/64) to explore appreciation, perceived effectiveness and usefulness, satisfaction, intention to continue use, and social acceptability. Some studies (14.4%, 16/111) assessed dimensions more closely related to usability (ie, burden of sensor wear and use, interface complexity, and perceived technical performance). ConclusionsThe rapid increase of research into the impact of physical activity apps and wearables means that evaluation guidelines are urgently needed to promote efficiency through the use of rapid research designs, in-device sensors and user-logs to assess effectiveness, engagement, and acceptability. Screening articles was time-consuming because reporting across health and computing sciences lacked standardization. Reporting guidelines are therefore needed to facilitate the synthesis of evidence across disciplines.

This paper investigated facilitators and barriers to implementing the European Football Fans in Training program (EuroFIT) in professional sports clubs in England, the Netherlands, Norway, and Portugal. We analyzed qualitative data collected at clubs that delivered EuroFIT, based on semi-structured interviews with coordinating staff (n = 15), coaches (n = 16), and focus group interviews with participants (n = 108), as well as data from clubs that considered delivering EuroFIT in the future, based on interviews with staff (n = 7) and stakeholders (n = 8). Facilitators for implementation related to the content and structure of the program, its evidence-base, and the context for delivery in the football stadia. Financial and human resources were both facilitators and barriers. Further barriers were mostly practical, relating to human resources and infrastructure. Major differences between countries related to experience and commitment to running community projects, and differences in infrastructure, financing, and human resources. Professional football clubs' ability to support health promotion efforts depended on their ethos and the financial and human resources available to them. Overall, the EuroFIT program was well received by clubs, coaches, participants, and stakeholders, which was reflected by the many facilitators supporting sustained implementation. For sustainable implementation, it is crucial that clubs and their stakeholders engage fully with the EuroFIT program and understand that for an adequate program delivery their views (ethos) and ways of working influence the implementation and thereby the effectiveness of EuroFIT. An important prerequisite for future roll out of EuroFIT would be a strong EuroFIT delivery partner organization to ensure financial and human resources while overseeing and guiding the quality of delivery in clubs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Author(s): Sally Wyke 1,*, Christopher Bunn 1, Eivind Andersen 2, Marlene N. Silva 3, Femke van Nassau 4, Paula McSkimming 5, Spyros Kolovos 6, Jason M. R. Gill 7, Cindy [...], Background Reducing sitting time as well as increasing physical activity in inactive people is beneficial for their health. This paper investigates the effectiveness of the European Fans in Training (EuroFIT) programme to improve physical activity and sedentary time in male football fans, delivered through the professional football setting. Methods and findings A total of 1,113 men aged 30-65 with self-reported body mass index (BMI) [greater than or equal to]27 kg/m.sup.2 took part in a randomised controlled trial in 15 professional football clubs in England, the Netherlands, Norway, and Portugal. Recruitment was between September 19, 2015, and February 2, 2016. Participants consented to study procedures and provided usable activity monitor baseline data. They were randomised, stratified by club, to either the EuroFIT intervention or a 12-month waiting list comparison group. Follow-up measurement was post-programme and 12 months after baseline. EuroFIT is a 12-week, group-based programme delivered by coaches in football club stadia in 12 weekly 90-minute sessions. Weekly sessions aimed to improve physical activity, sedentary time, and diet and maintain changes long term. A pocket-worn device (SitFIT) allowed self-monitoring of sedentary time and daily steps, and a game-based app (MatchFIT) encouraged between-session social support. Primary outcome (objectively measured sedentary time and physical activity) measurements were obtained for 83% and 85% of intervention and comparison participants. Intention-to-treat analyses showed a baseline-adjusted mean difference in sedentary time at 12 months of -1.6 minutes/day (97.5% confidence interval [CI], -14.3-11.0; p = 0.77) and in step counts of 678 steps/day (97.5% CI, 309-1.048; p < 0.001) in favor of the intervention. There were significant improvements in diet, weight, well-being, self-esteem, vitality, and biomarkers of cardiometabolic health in favor of the intervention group, but not in quality of life. There was a 0.95 probability of EuroFIT being cost-effective compared with the comparison group if society is willing to pay £1.50 per extra step/day, a maximum probability of 0.61 if society is willing to pay £1,800 per minute less sedentary time/day, and 0.13 probability if society is willing to pay £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). It was not possible to blind participants to group allocation. Men attracted to the programme already had quite high levels of physical activity at baseline (8,372 steps/day), which may have limited room for improvement. Although participants came from across the socioeconomic spectrum, a majority were well educated and in paid work. There was an increase in recent injuries and in upper and lower joint pain scores post-programme. In addition, although the five-level EuroQoL questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) is now the preferred measure for cost-effectiveness analyses across Europe, baseline scores were high (0.93), suggesting a ceiling effect for QALYs. Conclusion Participation in EuroFIT led to improvements in physical activity, diet, body weight, and biomarkers of cardiometabolic health, but not in sedentary time at 12 months. Within-trial analysis suggests it is not cost-effective in the short term for QALYs due to a ceiling effect in quality of life. Nevertheless, decision-makers may consider the incremental cost for increase in steps worth the investment. Trial registration International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials, ISRCTN-81935608.