Audio vs text produce-app RCT
A tailored mobile app’s audio messages raised fruit intake more than text or control, while vegetable intake showed no overall main effect.
Source
A Mobile Phone App Intervention Targeting Fruit and Vegetable Consumption: The Efficacy of Textual and Auditory Tailored Health Information Tested in a Randomized Controlled Trial
What they did
Adults were randomized to text-based tailored app content, audio-based tailored content, or control questionnaires only; fruit and vegetable intake were assessed at 6 months.
What they found
Audio coaching increased fruit intake by about three pieces per week versus text and control; vegetable intake had no significant main effect of condition (literacy interactions noted).
The limits
What it doesn't show
Effects were modest, sample attrition was high, and findings may not generalize beyond motivated app users.
Key terms
- Tailoring
- Personalizing health messages to individual intake and characteristics.
- mHealth app
- Smartphone application delivering health behaviour content.
- Audio-based messaging
- Spoken tailored feedback rather than on-screen text.
- Health literacy
- Ability to obtain and use health information; tested as a moderator.
- Intention-to-treat
- Analyzing participants by assigned arm regardless of dropout.
- Control condition
- Baseline/posttest measures without tailored app content.
Flashcards
Want these cards to stick?
Save the deck to NoteFren and study it with spaced repetition.
Quiz yourself
Design?
Common questions
What conditions were compared?
Text-tailored app, audio-tailored app, and no-content control.
What clearly improved?
Fruit intake with the audio arm (~3 pieces/week).
Did vegetables change overall?
No significant main effect of condition on vegetable intake.
Analytic sample size?
146 respondents completing analyses (many highly educated women).
More on mHealth