Author(s):

  • Régnier, Faustine
  • Chauvel, Louis

Abstract:

Background: Digital devices are driving economic and social transformations, but assessing the uses, perceptions, and impact of these new technologies on diet and physical activity remains a major societal challenge.

Objective: We aimed to determine under which social, economic, and cultural conditions individuals in France were more likely to be actively invested in the use of self-tracking diet and fitness apps for better health behaviors.

Methods: Existing users of 3 diet and fitness self-tracking apps (Weight Watchers, MyFitnessPal, and sport apps) were recruited from 3 regions of France. We interviewed 79 individuals (Weight Watchers, n=37; MyFitnessPal, n=20; sport apps, n=22). In-depth semistructured interviews were conducted with each participant, using open-ended questions about their use of diet and fitness apps. A triangulation of methods (content, textual, and quantitative analyses) was performed.

Results: We found 3 clusters of interviewees who differed by social background and curative goal linked to use under constraint versus preventive goal linked to chosen use, and intensity of their self-quantification efforts and participation in social networks. Interviewees used the apps for a diversity of uses, including measurement, tracking, quantification, and participation in digital communities. A digital divide was highlighted, comprising a major social gap. Social conditions for appropriation of self-tracking devices included sociodemographic factors, life course stages, and cross-cutting factors of heterogeneity.

Conclusions: Individuals from affluent or intermediate social milieus were most likely to use the apps and to participate in the associated online social networks. These interviewees also demonstrated a preventive approach to a healthy lifestyle. Individuals from lower milieus were more reluctant to use digital devices relating to diet and physical activity or to participate in self-quantification. The results of the study have major implications for public health: the digital self-quantification device is intrinsically less important than the way the individual uses it, in terms of adoption of successful health behaviors.

Document:

https://doi.org/10.2196/mhealth.9189

References:
  1. Peng W, Kanthawala S, Yuan S, Hussain SA. A qualitative study of user perceptions of mobile health apps. BMC Public Health 2016 Nov 14;16(1):1158 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  2. Pharabod AS, Nikolski V, Granjon F. La mise en chiffres de soi. Une approche compréhensive des mesures personnelles [Putting yourself into figures. A comprehensive approach to personal measurements]. Réseaux 2013;177:97-129. [CrossRef]
  3. Zaidan S, Roehrer E. Popular mobile phone apps for diet and weight loss: a content analysis. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2016 Jul 11;4(3):e80 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  4. Fox S, Duggan M. Pew Internet. 2013 Jan 15. Health Online 2013   URL: http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/01/15/health-online-2013/ [accessed 2018-03-27] [WebCite Cache]
  5. Cabinet Deloitte. 2016. Les Français et la santé. Etude Santé 2016   URL: https:/​/www2.​deloitte.com/​fr/​fr/​pages/​sante-et-sciences-de-la-vie/​articles/​les-francais-et-la-sante-etude-2016.​html [accessed 2018-04-03] [WebCite Cache]
  6. Broekhuizen K, Kroeze W, van Poppel MN, Oenema A, Brug J. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials on the effectiveness of computer-tailored physical activity and dietary behavior promotion programs: an update. Ann Behav Med 2012 Oct;44(2):259-286 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  7. Spring B, Duncan JM, Janke EA, Kozak AT, McFadden HG, DeMott A, et al. Integrating technology into standard weight loss treatment: a randomized controlled trial. J Am Med Assoc Intern Med 2013 Jan 28;173(2):105-111 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  8. Lyzwinski LN. A systematic review and meta-analysis of mobile devices and weight loss with an intervention content analysis. J Pers Med 2014 Jun 30;4(3):311-385 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  9. Flores Mateo G, Granado-Font E, Ferré-Grau C, Montaña-Carreras X. Mobile phone apps to promote weight loss and increase physical activity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Med Internet Res 2015 Nov 10;17(11):e253 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  10. Laing BY, Mangione CM, Tseng CH, Leng M, Vaisberg E, Mahida M, et al. Effectiveness of a smartphone application for weight loss compared with usual care in overweight primary care patients: a randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med 2014 Nov 18;161(10 Suppl):S5-12 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  11. Loiselle CG, Ahmed S. Is connected health contributing to a healthier population? J Med Internet Res 2017 Nov 10;19(11):e386 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  12. De Cock N, Vangeel J, Lachat C, Beullens K, Vervoort L, Goossens L, et al. Use of fitness and nutrition apps: associations with body mass index, snacking, and drinking habits in adolescents. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2017 Apr 25;5(4):e58 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  13. Ng K, Tynjälä J, Kokko S. Ownership and use of commercial physical activity trackers among Finnish adolescents: cross-sectional study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2017 May 04;5(5):e61 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  14. Lupton D. The Imperative of Health: Public Health and the Regulated Body. London: Sage Publications; 1995.
  15. Lupton D. Quantifying the body: monitoring and measuring health in the age of mHealth technologies. Crit Public Health 2013 May 03;23(4):393-403. [CrossRef]
  16. Fainzang S. Patients, médecins et santé connectée. Pratiques. Cahiers de la médecine utopique. 2017 Nov.   URL: https://pratiques.fr/-Pratiques-No79-Sante-connectee
  17. Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care 2007 Dec;19(6):349-357 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  18. Jospe MR, Fairbairn KA, Green P, Perry TL. Diet app use by sports dietitians: a survey in five countries. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2015 Jan 22;3(1):e7 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  19. Jebb SA, Ahern AL, Olson AD, Aston LM, Holzapfel C, Stoll J, et al. Primary care referral to a commercial provider for weight loss treatment versus standard care: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2011 Oct 22;378(9801):1485-1492 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  20. Carter N, Bryant-Lukosius D, DiCenso A, Blythe J, Neville AJ. The use of triangulation in qualitative research. Oncol Nurs Forum 2014 Sep;41(5):545-547. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  21. Rabe-Hesketh S, Everitt BS. A Handbook of Statistical Analyses Using Stata. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC; 2007.
  22. Darmon M. A people thinning institution: changing bodies and soul in a commercial weight-loss group. Ethnography 2012;13(3):375-398. [CrossRef]
  23. Beuscart JS, Dagiral É, Parasie S. Sociologie d’Internet [Internet Sociology]. Paris: Armand Colin; 2016.
  24. Nguyen A, Mosadeghi S, Almario CV. Persistent digital divide in access to and use of the Internet as a resource for health information: results from a California population-based study. Int J Med Inform 2017 Jul;103:49-54. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  25. Berlin N, Dargnies MP. Gender differences in reactions to feedback and willingness to compete. J Econ Behav Organ 2016 Oct;130:320-336. [CrossRef]
  26. Zillien N, Hargittai E. Digital distinction: status-specific types of internet usage. Soc Sci Q 2009 Jun;90(2):274-291. [CrossRef]
  27. Tang J, Abraham C, Stamp E, Greaves C. How can weight-loss app designers’ best engage and support users? A qualitative investigation. Br J Health Psychol 2015 Feb;20(1):151-171. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  28. Reckinger R, Régnier F. Diet and public health campaigns: implementation and appropriation of nutritional recommendations in France and Luxembourg. Appetite 2017 May 01;112:249-259. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  29. Régnier F, Masullo A. Obésité, goûts et consommation. Intégration des normes d’alimentation et appartenance sociale [Obesity, taste, and consumption. Integration of food standards and social belonging]. Rev Fr Sociol 2009;50:747-773. [CrossRef]
  30. Blank G, Reisdorf BC. The participatory web. ‎Inf Commun Soc 2012 May;15(4):537-554. [CrossRef]
  31. Bourdieu P. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1984.
  32. Bigot R, Croutte P, Daudey E. La diffusion des technologies de l’information et de la communication dans la société française. In: Collection des Rapports. Paris: CRÉDOC; Nov 2013.
  33. Plessz M, Dubuisson-Quellier S, Gojard S, Barrey S. How consumption prescriptions affect food practices: assessing the roles of household resources and life-course events. J Consumer Cult 2014 Feb 04;16(1):101-123. [CrossRef]
  34. Shi J, Salmon CT. Identifying opinion leaders to promote organ donation on social media: network study. J Med Internet Res 2018 Jan 09;20(1):e7 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  35. Kim J. A qualitative analysis of user experiences with a self-tracker for activity, sleep, and diet. Interact J Med Res 2014 Mar 04;3(1):e8 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]

The SELF Institute