mHealth
Audio vs text produce-app RCT
Open access · cc by · source: Europe PMC
A tailored mobile app’s audio messages raised fruit intake more than text or control, while vegetable intake showed no overall main effect.
How this study connects
Role on claims
Each row is a claim on a concept or method page where this paper supports, challenges, or qualifies the statement. Roles are hand-checked — not a model guess.
Multiple studies in this library examine mhealth with empirical patient or population outcomes rather than opinion alone.
Evidence for the claim as stated.
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).
Evidence for the claim as stated.
Effect sizes and settings differ across mhealth studies — digital vs clinic, trial vs observational — so results should not be pooled casually.
Evidence for the claim as stated.
ITT does not require individual randomisation. A 12-week open-label cluster-randomised pilot at 13 US primary-care sites found digital-medicine users had about 9 mm Hg greater SBP reduction by week 4, with more patients at BP goal by week 12. That is an effect of site-level assignment, unblinded, and not a hard cardiovascular-event result. A produce-app RCT that increased fruit intake by about three pieces per week also reported high attrition — another ITT-with-missing-data problem.
Evidence for the claim as stated.
Open questions
Tensions this paper is part of
From concept pages' “where studies disagree.” Disagreement means the same question; scope means different assays, populations, or outcomes.
Effect sizes and settings differ across mhealth studies — digital vs clinic, trial vs observational — so results should not be pooled casually.
- Supports · Woebot chatbot for substance use
- Supports · MoodGYM improves population wellbeing
Study at a glance
- Design
- RCT — Three-arm RCT: text-tailored vs audio-tailored vs questionnaire control
- N
- N=146 · Final analytic sample
- Population
- Adults using a fruit-and-vegetable mobile app intervention
- Outcome
- Fruit and vegetable intake at 6 months
Structured fields used in claim comparison tables when every cited study has a complete layer.
Inspect source passages
Audio vs text produce-app RCT
These passages occur verbatim in the stored paper text. They support the points listed below; they do not verify every statement in the explanation.
Final analytic sample was 146 respondents (73.3% female).
The final sample for the analyses consisted of 146 respondents of whom 73.3% were females (n=107), 71.2% were highly educated (n=104), varied in age from 16 to 71 years (mean 41.4, SD 14.6), and with a mean BMI of 25.2 (SD 5.5).
Audio messaging raised fruit intake by a mean of three pieces per week.
The auditory mode of communication, but not the textual mode of communication, led to increased fruit consumption with a mean increase of three pieces of fruit a week.
Key findings
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).
Methodology
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.
Limitations
Effects were modest, sample attrition was high, and findings may not generalize beyond motivated app users.
Related papers in this topic
Same topic cluster — not a recommendation engine.