Search

Additional file 1.

© The Author(s) 2023. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data., Background: Sedentary behavior (SB) has been linked to several negative health outcomes. Therefore, reducing SB or breaking up prolonged periods of SB improves functional fitness, food consumption, job satisfaction, and productivity. Reducing SB can be achieved by introducing a health-enhancing contextual modification promoted by a sit-stand desk in the workplace. The primary goal will be to test the effectiveness of this intervention in reducing and breaking up SB, while improving health outcomes in office-based workers during a 6-month intervention. Methods: A two-arm (1:1), superiority parallel-group cluster RCT will be conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of this intervention in a sample of office-based workers from a university in Portugal. The intervention will consist of a psychoeducation session, motivational prompts, and contextual modification promoted by a sit-stand desk in the workplace for 6 months. The control group will work as usual in their workplace, with no contextual change or prompts during the 6-month intervention. Three assessment points will be conducted in both groups, pre-intervention (baseline), post-intervention, and a 3-month follow-up. The primary outcomes include sedentary and physical activity-related variables, which will be objectively assessed with 24 h monitoring using the ActivPAL for 7 days. The secondary outcomes include (a) biometric indices as body composition, body mass index, waist circumference, and postural inequalities; and (b) psychosocial variables such as overall and work-related fatigue, overall discomfort, life/work satisfaction, quality of life, and eating behavior. Both the primary and secondary outcomes will be assessed at each assessment point. Discussion: This study will lean on the use of a sit-stand workstation for 6 months, prompted by an initial psychoeducational session and ongoing motivational prompts. We will aim to contribute to this topic by providing robust data on alternating sitting and standing postures in the workplace. Trial registration: The trial was prospectively registered, and the details are at: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/JHGPW ; Registered 15 November 2022. OSF Preregistration., This study was funded by the ILIND “Fazer+” scientific program (Reference: FAZER+/ILIND/CIDEFES/1/2022).

Funding Information: The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: MMM is funded by a Marie-Sklodowska-Curie (EDGE) Fellowship programme (grant agreement No. 713567). This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 643309. The material presented and views expressed here are the responsibility of the authors only. Publisher Copyright: © The Author(s) 2022. Objective: To identify the core components of digital behaviour change interventions for weight loss maintenance targeting physical activity, in terms of: (i) behaviour change techniques, (ii) mechanisms of action, (iii) modes of delivery, (iv) dose and (v) tailoring/personalization. In addition, the links between these components were investigated. Methods: A literature search was performed in five electronic databases: PubMed, Embase, CINHAL, PsycINFO and Web of Science. Two reviewers independently screened the identified articles and extracted data related with the study characteristics and behaviour change techniques, mechanism of action, mode of delivery, dose, and tailoring, using standardized classifications whenever available (e.g. behaviour change techniques taxonomy). Results: Seventeen articles reporting 11 original studies were selected. Two studies were protocols, 9 studies presented results for weight change and all but one showed no significant differences between the intervention and control groups. Eight studies (73%) provided adequate information on behaviour change techniques. Five studies (45%) provided partial information about how the behaviour change techniques were linked to mechanisms of action, and only one study (0.9%) described these links for all the techniques. Around half of the studies reported the modes through which behaviour change techniques were delivered. Descriptions of dose were present in most studies, but with minimal information. The use of tailoring or personalization approaches was mentioned in eight studies (73%), but descriptions of what was tailored and how were minimal. Conclusions: The compilation of information regarding intervention components was difficult due to the lack of information and systematization in reporting across papers. This is particularly true for the reporting of the links between behaviour change techniques and the other core intervention components. This information is crucial to help us understand in the context of behaviour change interventions what works or does not work, how it works and why. publishersversion published

Systematic Review Protocol Administrative information Title (1): Triathlon: Predicting factors for cardiorespiratory fitness and performance, protocol for a systematic review. Registration (2): OSF and PROSPERO. Authors (3): Henrique Telhado (HT), Universidade Lusófona, htelhado@gmail.com António Palmeira (AP), (guarantor of the review), Universidade Lusófona antonio.palmeira@ulusofona.pt Luís Ascensão (LA), Universidade Lusófona, luispt1989@gmail.com Vitor Azevedo (VA), Universidade Lusófona, vitorhazevedo@hotmail.com Lúcia Gomes (LG), Universidade Lusófona, p2156@ulht.pt Corresponding author: Henrique Telhado, Rua das Vinhas de São Sebastião, lote B, 2705-347 Colares, Portugal All authors (excluding AP) will undertake independently a two-step selection, with studies screened via titles and abstracts followed by a full-text review, in groups of two authors; a minimum of five percent of the studies will be selected by the four authors. Data extraction will be undertake by HT, via standardized data extraction tables. All reviewers (excluding AP) will rate independently all included studies for risk of bias in groups of two; a minimum of five percent of the studies will be rated by the four reviewers. Amendment (4): This protocol is not an amendment. Support (5): No financial support or sponsor will be used in this review. The premises of CIDEFES (Centro de Investigação em Desporto, Educação Física E Saúde) will be used to develop this review. Introduction Rationale (6): Triathlon is a sport that includes three endurance disciplines swimming, cycling and running carried out continuously and sequentially, performed in different sets of distances and consists of one of the most demanding events in endurance sports. There are many factors that play an important role in triathlon performance: physiological, anthropometric, biomechanics, nutrition, environmental conditions (Olcina et al., 2018), psychological (Olmedilla et al., 2018), age, sex, experience (Knechtle et al., 2015), race strategy (Abbiss et al., 2006), training and deliberate practice (Macnamara et al., 2016), with some of these factors being more prevalent in different triathlon distances, and managing these factors to improve performance, maintaining athletes healthy mentally and physically requires a delicate balance. Objectives (7): From our previous research we have not been able to detect any systematic review of literature regarding the predicting factors for cardiorespiratory fitness and performance in triathlon including physiological factors, psychological factors, historic record, deliberate practice and race strategy. Therefore, it is objective of this review to analyse the published literature of the predicting factors for cardiorespiratory fitness and performance in triathlon. Methods Eligibility criteria (8): The primary question for this review is “What are the predicting factors for cardiorespiratory fitness and performance in triathlon?” and the respective components as follows: Population: Triathlon OR Ironman; Intervention/Exposure: Physiological OR Psychological OR Grit OR Motivation OR Vo2max OR Number of triathlons OR strategy OR Deliberate practice; Outcome: cardiorespiratory fitness OR performance. The following inclusion criteria were defined: triathlon (defined as swimming, cycling and running up to the distance of a full ironman) as a sport or if multisport, results per sport; written in Portuguese, English, Spanish or French, not limiting for published date; studies published in peer reviewed journals and studies based on cardiorespiratory fitness or performance, excluding the ones assessing injuries, genetics, nutrition, supplementation, altitude/pressure, temperature, gender, age, drafting, swimsuit or other equipment. The following exclusion criteria were defined: reviews, studies assessing off-road triathlon or para-triathlon, studies assessing exclusively physiological, neuromuscular and psychological changes during practice or races. Information sources (9): For the systematic search we have selected the following databases: SportDiscus, PubMed and PsycINFO. Search will be done till the 8th of March, 2022 without limitation for published date given that no previous systematic review was found. Search strategy (10): The research string was compounded as follows: (Triathl* OR Ironm*) AND (Physiological OR Psychological OR Grit OR Motivatio* OR VO2max OR "Number of triathl*" OR strateg* OR "Deliberate practice") AND (VO2max OR Performance) NOT (review OR injuries OR paratriathlon OR ultra-triathlon OR swimsuit OR genetics OR altitude), and will be applied to the three databases. Study records (11): For the studies identified by the research string, both titles and abstracts will be screened in one step, and in a second step the selected studies at full text, both operations will be done underlining the PICO words and applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria using CADIMA automation tool (Julius Kühn-Institut, Erwin-Baur-Str. 27, 06484 Quedlinburg, Germany), by groups of two reviewers independently. If selection will not fully match, new selection will be made till a consensus is achieved. The data extraction will be performed by the main author using supporting tables. Data items (12): The following variables will be collected from selected studies: title, authors, year, participants, type of study, region, instruments, procedures, measures, outcomes. Outcomes and prioritization (13): The main outcomes are the predicting factors for cardiorespiratory fitness and performance in triathlon and for the purpose of syntheses outcomes will be grouped in (i) physiologic and anthropometric, (ii) psychologic, (iii) training and practice, and (iv) race strategy and experience. Risk of bias in individual studies (14): the risk of bias assessment will be done at study level using NIH quality assessment tools (National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Building 31, 31 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892). Data synthesis (15): whenever studies’ outcomes are quantitatively presented using the same measures, they will be quantitatively synthetized using the same measures.

Here you can find the files of the project named "Exercise Socially Contagious" Randomized Controlled Trial, where we tested the influence of social contagion through strangers on physical activity and sedentary behavior

Funding Information: This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under grant agreement 643309. The material presented and views expressed here are the responsibility of the author(s) only. The European Commission takes no responsibility for any use made of the information set out. Background: The use of digital interventions can be accurately monitored via log files. However, monitoring engagement with intervention goals or enactment of the actual behaviors targeted by the intervention is more difficult and is usually evaluated based on pre-post measurements in a controlled trial. Objective: The objective of this paper is to evaluate if engaging with 2 digital intervention modules focusing on (1) physical activity goals and action plans and (2) coping with barriers has immediate effects on the actual physical activity behavior. Methods: The NoHoW Toolkit (TK), a digital intervention developed to support long-term weight loss maintenance, was evaluated in a 2 x 2 factorial randomized controlled trial. The TK contained various modules based on behavioral self-regulation and motivation theories, as well as contextual emotion regulation approaches, and involved continuous tracking of weight and physical activity through connected commercial devices (Fitbit Aria and Charge 2). Of the 4 trial arms, 2 had access to 2 modules directly targeting physical activity: a module for goal setting and action planning (Goal) and a module for identifying barriers and coping planning (Barriers). Module visits and completion were determined based on TK log files and time spent in the module web page. Seven physical activity metrics (steps; activity; energy expenditure; fairly active, very active and total active minutes; and distance) were compared before and after visiting and completing the modules to examine whether the modules had immediate or sustained effects on physical activity. Immediate effect was determined based on 7-day windows before and after the visit, and sustained effects were evaluated for 1 to 8 weeks after module completion. Results: Out of the 811 participants, 498 (61.4%) visited the Goal module and 406 (50.1%) visited the Barriers module. The Barriers module had an immediate effect on very active and total active minutes (very active minutes: before median 24.2, IQR 10.4-43.0 vs after median 24.9, IQR 10.0-46.3; P=.047; total active minutes: before median 45.1, IQR 22.9-74.9 vs after median 46.9, IQR 22.4-78.4; P=.03). The differences were larger when only completed Barriers modules were considered. The Barriers module completion was also associated with sustained effects in fairly active and total active minutes for most of the 8 weeks following module completion and for 3 weeks in very active minutes. Conclusions: The Barriers module had small, significant, immediate, and sustained effects on active minutes measured by a wrist-worn activity tracker. Future interventions should pay attention to assessing barriers and planning coping mechanisms to overcome them. Trial Registration: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN88405328; https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN88405328 publishersversion published

Supplemental material, sj-docx-5-dhj-10.1177_20552076221129089 for What goes on in digital behaviour change interventions for weight loss maintenance targeting physical activity: A scoping review by Jorge Encantado, António L Palmeira, Carolina Silva, Falko F Sniehotta, R James Stubbs, Maria João Gouveia, Pedro J Teixeira, Berit L Heitmann and Marta M Marques in Digital Health

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-dhj-10.1177_20552076221129089 for What goes on in digital behaviour change interventions for weight loss maintenance targeting physical activity: A scoping review by Jorge Encantado, António L Palmeira, Carolina Silva, Falko F Sniehotta, R James Stubbs, Maria João Gouveia, Pedro J Teixeira, Berit L Heitmann and Marta M Marques in Digital Health

Funding Information: The authors thank Sarah E Scott for her valuable contributions as the trial manager and in the user experience evaluation, and Susana Cunha for her contribution in conducting and reporting the focus groups. This project has received funding from the European Union?s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under grant agreement number 643309. The material presented and views expressed here are the responsibility of the authors only. The European Union Commission does not take responsibility for any use made of the information set out. Background: Digital behavior change interventions (DBCIs) offer a promising channel for providing health promotion services. However, user experience largely determines whether they are used, which is a precondition for effectiveness. Objective: The primary aim of this study is to evaluate user experiences with the NoHoW Toolkit (TK)—a DBCI that targets weight loss maintenance—over a 12-month period by using a mixed methods approach and to identify the main strengths and weaknesses of the TK and the external factors affecting its adoption. The secondary aim is to objectively describe the measured use of the TK and its association with user experience. Methods: An 18-month, 2×2 factorial randomized controlled trial was conducted. The trial included 3 intervention arms receiving an 18-week active intervention and a control arm. The user experience of the TK was assessed quantitatively through electronic questionnaires after 1, 3, 6, and 12 months of use. The questionnaires also included open-ended items that were thematically analyzed. Focus group interviews were conducted after 6 months of use and thematically analyzed to gain deeper insight into the user experience. Log files of the TK were used to evaluate the number of visits to the TK, the total duration of time spent in the TK, and information on intervention completion. Results: The usability level of the TK was rated as satisfactory. User acceptance was rated as modest; this declined during the trial in all the arms, as did the objectively measured use of the TK. The most appreciated features were weekly emails, graphs, goal setting, and interactive exercises. The following 4 themes were identified in the qualitative data: engagement with features, decline in use, external factors affecting user experience, and suggestions for improvements. Conclusions: The long-term user experience of the TK highlighted the need to optimize the technical functioning, appearance, and content of the DBCI before and during the trial, similar to how a commercial app would be optimized. In a trial setting, the users should be made aware of how to use the intervention and what its requirements are, especially when there is more intensive intervention content. publishersversion published

Supplemental material, sj-docx-2-dhj-10.1177_20552076221129089 for What goes on in digital behaviour change interventions for weight loss maintenance targeting physical activity: A scoping review by Jorge Encantado, António L Palmeira, Carolina Silva, Falko F Sniehotta, R James Stubbs, Maria João Gouveia, Pedro J Teixeira, Berit L Heitmann and Marta M Marques in Digital Health