Cited by 113Social Media in Health EducationHealth Literacy and Information AccessibilityDigital Mental Health Interventions

Using Google Analytics as a process evaluation method for Internet-delivered interventions: an example on sexual health

Open access
Crutzen, R., Roosjen, J. L., Poelman, J.·2013·Health Promotion International

Abstract

The study aimed to demonstrate the potential of Google Analytics as a process evaluation method for Internet-delivered interventions, using a website about sexual health as an example. This study reports visitors' behavior until 21 months after the release of the website (March 2009-December 2010). In total, there were 850 895 visitors with an average total visiting time (i.e. dose) of 5:07 min. Google Analytics provided data to answer three key questions in terms of process evaluation of an Internet-delivered intervention: (i) How do visitors behave?; (ii) Where do visitors come from? and (iii) What content are visitors exposed to? This real-life example demonstrated the potential of Google Analytics as a method to be used in a process evaluation of Internet-delivered interventions. This is highly relevant given the current expansion of these interventions within the field of health promotion.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/heapro/das008

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Crutzen, R., Roosjen, J. L., & Poelman, J.
Affiliations
Maastricht University (NL)
Corresponding author
Crutzen, R.
Venue
Health Promotion International
Published
2012-02-29
Volume
28
Issue
1
Pages
36-42
ISSN
  • 0957-4824 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2245
OpenAlex
W2116194564
Cited by
113
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 3
FWCI
9.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Health Promotion International (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Social Media in Health Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
Keywords
Google Analytics, process evaluation, online intervention, sexual health, website visitors, visitor behavior, website traffic, health promotion, online health interventions
MeSH terms
Health Education, Health Promotion, Humans, Software, Internet, Informatics, Data Mining, Reproductive Health

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