Healthy
Conditions
Keywords
artificial intelligence, Implementation science, college students, food security, diet quality
Brief summary
The goal of this feasibility study is to determine the adherence, acceptability, and usability of the behavioral intervention of a mobile AI application and its effects on food choices and diet quality. A secondary goal is to assess whether the app's accuracy or feasibility differs by food security status. Study participants are UC Davis students aged 18-24 years. The main question it aims to answer is: \- Does the gamified app version that delivers behavioral nudges have a higher adherence and acceptability rate, and does this translate to better dietary behaviors? Participants will use either the intervention app (dietary assessment + gamification) or the control app (non-gamified, dietary assessment only) for six weeks to record all their food intake. Diet quality will be assessed at baseline and endline, and a Likert scale acceptability questionnaire will be administered at endline.
Interventions
OTHERA mobile application that uses AI to deliver behavioral nudges that encourage healthy food choices.
As a mobile application for assessing dietary intake, the app provides a daily report of food intake- a core function that both the gamified and limited app versions have. The gamified version has the added functionality of delivering behavioral nudges that encourage healthy food selections.
OTHERLimited app version for dietary assessment only
This app version provides a daily report of energy and nutrient intake- available to those randomized to the control group
Sponsors
University of California, Davis
International Food Policy Research Institute
Penn State University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 24 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Willing to use their smartphones with app to record all foods consumed * UC Davis student
Exclusion criteria
* eating disorders * Participant in the validation study that tested the app's accuracy against weighed food records
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| App acceptability by version assigned to participants | Measured at endline: at the end of the 6 week period | Acceptability will be assessed using a structured questionnaire based on a Likert scale from 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree) administered at the end of the study period. |
| App's usability by version assigned to participants | Measured at endline: at the end of the 6 week period | Focus group discussions will be conducted with a select group of participants to assess usability (i.e. facilitators and barriers to app usage) at the end of the study period. |
| App adherence rates by version assigned to participants | Assessed at midline (3 weeks) and endline (6 weeks) | App usage adherence will be evaluated based on analytics data, with a 70% usage threshold defined for both the midline and endline assessments. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Diet quality assessment by app version, measured using Healthy Eating Index scores at baseline and endline. | From enrollment till study completion at 6 weeks | Determine changes in diet quality by app version. The Healthy Eating Index is scored from 0-100. The higher the score, the better the alignment of a diet with key recommendations in the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. |
| App usability by food security status assessed using the USDA 10-item food security survey module | Food security assessed at baseline | The validated USDA 10-item Food Security Survey Module will be used to capture food security over the prior 12 months and be administered at the recruitment visit. Moderation of app's usability by food security status will be assessed by including an interaction term between the app version and food security strata. Food security status is assigned as follows- Raw score zero: High food security; Raw score 1-2: Marginal food security; Raw score 3-5: Low food security; Raw score 6-10:Very low food security. |
| App acceptability by food security status assessed using the USDA 10-item food security survey module | Food security assessed at baseline | The validated USDA 10-item Food Security Survey Module will be used to capture food security over the prior 12 months and be administered at the recruitment visit. Moderation of app's acceptability by food security status will be assessed by including an interaction term between the app version and food security strata. Food security status is assigned as follows- Raw score zero: High food security; Raw score 1-2: Marginal food security; Raw score 3-5: Low food security; Raw score 6-10:Very low food security. |
| App adherence rates by food security status assessed using the USDA 10-item food security survey module | Food security assessed at baseline | The validated USDA 10-item Food Security Survey Module will be used to capture food security over the prior 12 months and be administered at the recruitment visit. Moderation of app's adherence rates by food security status will be assessed by including an interaction term between the app version and food security strata. Food security status is assigned as follows- Raw score zero: High food security; Raw score 1-2: Marginal food security; Raw score 3-5: Low food security; Raw score 6-10:Very low food security. |
Countries
United States
Contacts
CONTACTChristabel A Domfe, MS
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORLauren E Au, PhD, RDN
University of California, Davis
Outcome results
None listed