Cited by 68Digital Mental Health InterventionsMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsBehavioral Health and Interventions

What makes people decide to visit and use an internet‐delivered behavior‐change intervention?: A qualitative study among adults

Open access
Brouwer, W., Oenema, A., Crutzen, R., de Nooijer, J., de Vries, N.K., Brug, J.·2009·Health Education

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to explore adults' cognitive deliberations in deciding to visit an internet intervention, to extend the visit to use and process the intervention's content, and to revisit the intervention. Design/methodology/approach: A qualitative study was conducted consisting of five focus group interviews (n = 29, 25‐69 years). The interview transcriptions were subjected to systematic content analysis. Findings: The results indicate that being motivated to change a health behavior and curiosity about the content were important factors in the decision to visit an internet intervention. To extend a visit, mainly intervention aspects were considered such as visual appeal, the number of questions needed to complete within the program, and the existence of a registration procedure. To induce revisits, regularly updated content and the possibility to monitor behavior change were important. Practical implications: These findings suggest that activities to promote use of internet interventions need to be directed at motivating adults to think about potential behavior change. Furthermore, intervention aspects need to meet various criteria, such as a professional appearance, concise and easy to understand texts and an explanation for the use of a registration procedure. Originality/value: The results of this explorative study can be used as a basis for further studies aimed at improving dissemination and use of internet‐delivered behavior change interventions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/09654280911001149

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Self-check

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

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brouwer, W., Oenema, A., Crutzen, R., de Nooijer, J., de Vries, N. K., & Brug, J.
Affiliations
  • Erasmus MC (NL)
  • Maastricht University (NL)
  • Amsterdam Public Health (NL)
Venue
Health Education
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2009-10-16
Volume
109
Issue
6
Pages
460-473
ISSN
0965-4283 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2042298697
Cited by
67
References
34
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 3
FWCI
4.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Locations
  • Health Education (publishedVersion)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
  • Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (submittedVersion)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Funders
ZonMw
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 › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
Keywords
online intervention, behaviour change interventions, intervention use, revisit intention, user decision-making, intervention design, visual appeal, registration procedures, content updates, behavioral monitoring

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