Effectiveness of a Multimodal Online Well-Being Intervention
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Well-being encompasses physical, psychological, and social aspects of health and predicts healthcare utilization and expenditures. Despite their potential clinical impact, interventions that leverage social network effects to target well-being are uncommon. PURPOSE: Using a pragmatic design, to evaluate the effectiveness of an online well-being intervention as part of ongoing program development. DESIGN: Randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial with longitudinal outcome measurements at baseline, 30 days, and 90 days. PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: A total of 1503 U.S.-based adults were enrolled. Recruitment, eligibility verification, and baseline data collection were conducted entirely online; follow-up took place online or by phone. The study was conducted in 2012. INTERVENTION: A multimodal e-mail-, web-, and mobile-based intervention (Daily Challenge), in which participants receive daily suggestions of small health actions that they complete in a social environment. A traditional weekly health newsletter served as control. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Overall well-being as measured by the Individual-level Well-Being Assessment and Scoring Method (scale: 0 to 100). RESULTS: Follow-up rates reached 68.7% (n=1032) at 30 days and 62.6% (n=940) at 90 days. Overall, 84.6% of treatment group participants visited the website, and 76.5% opened program e-mails (vs 51.1% in the control group). Daily Challenge improved well-being significantly more than control at 30 days (2.27 points, p=0.004) and at 90 days (2.35 points, p=0.004). A dose response for intensity of use was observed at 30 days (p=0.001) and 90 days (p=0.003). Well-being improvement was greater in participants with than without social ties in the program (at 30 days: p=0.02; at 90 days: p=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: A multimodal online intervention leveraging social network effects significantly improved well-being over control. Higher levels of participation as well as increasing levels of social integration were associated with greater improvement in well-being. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01586949).
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The complementarity of cognitive and behavioral theories may explain the large effect sizes of studies that applied both types of theories.
“Therefore, the complementarity of cognitive and behavioral theories may explain the large ESs of studies that applied both types of theories [62,93].”
From The Comparative Effectiveness of Mobile Phone Interventions in Improving Health Outcomes: Meta-Analytic Review (2019) · cites this paper as [62]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 29 · Cited by 53
- Authors
- Cobb, N. K., & Poirier, J.
- Affiliations
- Georgetown University Medical Center (US)
- Corresponding author
- Poirier, Josée
- ORCID
- Cobb, Nathan K
- Venue
- American Journal of Preventive Medicine
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2014-01
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 41-48
- ISSN
- 0749-3797 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W56107621
- Cited by
- 53
- References
- 29
- Citations by year
- 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 2
- FWCI
- 6.62
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- American Journal of Preventive Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
- Keywords
- well-being, online intervention, social network effects, social ties, mobile health, social integration, intervention participation, dose-response relationship
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Health Behavior, Social Media
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review