Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Department of Health Care Management, Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
JAMA Intern Med. 2019 Dec 1;179(12):1624-1632. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.3505.
Gamification, the use of game design elements in nongame contexts, is increasingly being used in workplace wellness programs and digital health applications. However, the best way to design social incentives in gamification interventions has not been well examined.
To assess the effectiveness of support, collaboration, and competition within a behaviorally designed gamification intervention to increase physical activity among overweight and obese adults.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This 36-week randomized clinical trial with a 24-week intervention and 12-week follow-up assessed 602 adults from 40 states with body mass indexes (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) of 25 or higher from February 12, 2018, to March 17, 2019.
Participants used a wearable device to track daily steps, established a baseline, selected a step goal increase, were randomly assigned to a control (n = 151) or to 1 of 3 gamification interventions (support [n = 151], collaboration [n = 150], and competition [n = 150]), and were remotely monitored. The control group received feedback from the wearable device but no other interventions for 36 weeks. The gamification arms were entered into a 24-week game designed using insights from behavioral economics with points and levels for achieving step goals. No gamification interventions occurred during follow-up.
The primary outcome was change in mean daily steps from baseline through the 24-week intervention period.
A total of 602 participants (mean [SD] age, 39 [10] years; mean [SD] body mass index, 30 [5]; 427 [70.9%] male) were included in the study. Compared with controls, participants had a significantly greater increase in mean daily steps from baseline during the intervention in the competition arm (adjusted difference, 920; 95% CI, 513-1328; P < .001), support arm (adjusted difference, 689; 95% CI, 267-977; P < .001), and collaboration arm (adjusted difference, 637; 95% CI, 258-1017; P = .001). During follow-up, physical activity remained significantly greater in the competition arm than in the control arm (adjusted difference, 569; 95% CI, 142-996; P = .009) but was not significantly greater in the support (adjusted difference, 428; 95% CI, 19-837; P = .04) and collaboration (adjusted difference, 126; 95% CI, -248 to 468; P = .49) arms than in the control arm.
All 3 gamification interventions significantly increased physical activity during the 24-week intervention, and competition was the most effective. Physical activity was lower in all arms during follow-up and only remained significantly greater in the competition arm than in the control arm.
ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03311230.
重要性:游戏化是将游戏设计元素应用于非游戏情境中的一种手段,它在工作场所健康计划和数字健康应用中越来越受欢迎。然而,游戏化干预措施中设计社会激励的最佳方法尚未得到很好的研究。
目的:评估在行为设计的游戏化干预中支持、协作和竞争的有效性,以增加超重和肥胖成年人的身体活动。
设计、设置和参与者:这是一项 36 周的随机临床试验,干预期为 24 周,随访期为 12 周。参与者为来自 40 个州的 602 名成年人,体重指数(BMI)为 25 或更高(BMI 计算为体重除以身高的平方),年龄在 25 岁或以上。参与者于 2018 年 2 月 12 日至 2019 年 3 月 17 日期间使用可穿戴设备记录日常步数,建立基线,选择目标步数值增加,然后随机分配到对照组(n=151)或 3 个游戏化干预组之一(支持组[n=151]、协作组[n=150]和竞争组[n=150]),并接受远程监测。对照组在 36 周内仅从可穿戴设备获得反馈,不接受其他干预措施。游戏化手臂进入了一个为期 24 周的游戏,该游戏使用行为经济学的见解设计,有达到目标的分数和级别。在随访期间没有进行游戏化干预。
主要结果和测量:主要结果是从基线到 24 周干预期间平均每日步数的变化。
结果:共有 602 名参与者(平均[标准差]年龄,39[10]岁;平均[标准差]体重指数,30[5];427[70.9%]男性)纳入研究。与对照组相比,在竞争组(调整后的差异,920;95%CI,513-1328;P<.001)、支持组(调整后的差异,689;95%CI,267-977;P<.001)和协作组(调整后的差异,637;95%CI,258-1017;P=.001)中,参与者在干预期间平均每日步数有显著增加。在随访期间,竞争组的身体活动量仍显著高于对照组(调整后的差异,569;95%CI,142-996;P=.009),而支持组(调整后的差异,428;95%CI,19-837;P=.04)和协作组(调整后的差异,126;95%CI,-248 至 468;P=.49)与对照组相比则没有显著差异。
结论和相关性:所有 3 种游戏化干预措施在 24 周的干预期间都显著增加了身体活动量,竞争组最为有效。在随访期间,所有组的身体活动量都较低,只有竞争组的身体活动量仍显著高于对照组。
试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov 标识符:NCT03311230。