A Facebook-Delivered Weight Loss Intervention Using Open Enrollment: Randomized Pilot Feasibility Trial

Sherry L Pagoto, Matthew W Schroeder, Ran Xu, Molly E Waring, Laurie Groshon, Jared M Goetz, Christie Idiong, Haley Troy, Joseph DiVito, Richard Bannor, Sherry L Pagoto, Matthew W Schroeder, Ran Xu, Molly E Waring, Laurie Groshon, Jared M Goetz, Christie Idiong, Haley Troy, Joseph DiVito, Richard Bannor

Abstract

Background: Behavioral weight loss programs typically enroll 12-40 people into groups that then suffer from declining engagement over time. Web-based patient communities, on the other hand, typically offer no limits on capacity and membership is fluid. This model may be useful for boosting engagement in behavioral weight loss interventions, which could lead to better outcomes.

Objective: In this study, we aimed to examine the feasibility and acceptability of continuously enrolling participants into a Facebook-delivered weight loss intervention for the first 8 of 16 weeks relative to the same intervention where no new participants were enrolled after randomization.

Methods: We conducted a randomized pilot trial to compare a Facebook weight loss group that used open enrollment with a group that used closed enrollment on feasibility and acceptability in adults with BMI 27-45 kg/m2. The feasibility outcomes included retention, engagement, and diet tracking adherence. We described the percentage loss of ≥5% weight in both groups as an exploratory outcome. We also explored the relationship between total volume of activity in the group and weight loss. The participants provided feedback via web-based surveys and focus groups.

Results: Randomized participants (68/80, 85% women) were on average, aged 40.2 (SD 11.2) years with a mean BMI of 34.4 (SD 4.98) kg/m2. We enrolled an additional 54 participants (50/54, 93% female) in the open enrollment condition between weeks 1 and 8, resulting in a total group size of 94. Retention was 88% and 98% under the open and closed conditions, respectively. Randomized participants across conditions did not differ in engagement (P=.72), or diet tracking adherence (P=.42). Participant feedback in both conditions revealed that sense of community was what they liked most about the program and not enough individualized feedback was what they liked the least. Weight loss of ≥5% was achieved by 30% (12/40) of the participants randomized to the open enrollment condition and 18% (7/40) of the participants in the closed enrollment condition. Exploratory analyses revealed that the open condition (median 385, IQR 228-536.5) had a greater volume of engagement than the closed condition (median 215, IQR 145.5-292; P=.007). Furthermore, an increase of 100 in the total volume of engagement in the Facebook group each week was associated with an additional 0.1% weekly weight loss among the randomized participants (P=.02), which was independent of time, individual participant engagement, and sociodemographic characteristics.

Conclusions: Open enrollment was as feasible and acceptable as closed enrollment. A greater volume of engagement in the Facebook group was associated with weight loss, suggesting that larger groups that produce more engagement overall may be beneficial. Future research should examine the efficacy of the open enrollment approach for weight loss in a fully powered randomized trial.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02656680; https://ichgcp.net/clinical-trials-registry/NCT02656680.

Keywords: Facebook; mobile phone; obesity; social media; social networking; weight loss.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: SLP has been a paid advisor for WW (formerly Weight Watchers) and Fitbit.

©Sherry L Pagoto, Matthew W Schroeder, Ran Xu, Molly E Waring, Laurie Groshon, Jared M Goetz, Christie Idiong, Haley Troy, Joseph DiVito, Richard Bannor. Originally published in JMIR Formative Research (https://formative.jmir.org), 06.05.2022.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) diagram.

References

    1. Hales CM, Carroll MD, Fryar CD, Ogden CL. Prevalence of obesity and severe obesity among adults: United States, 2017-2018. NCHS Data Brief. 2020 Feb;(360):1–8.
    1. Pagoto S. The current state of lifestyle intervention implementation research: where do we go next? Transl Behav Med. 2011 Sep;1(3):401–5. doi: 10.1007/s13142-011-0071-x. 71
    1. Beleigoli AM, Andrade AQ, Cançado AG, Paulo MN, Diniz MD, Ribeiro AL. Web-based digital health interventions for weight loss and lifestyle habit changes in overweight and obese adults: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2019 Jan 08;21(1):e298. doi: 10.2196/jmir.9609. v21i1e298
    1. Pagoto S, Waring ME, May CN, Ding EY, Kunz WH, Hayes R, Oleski JL. Adapting behavioral interventions for social media delivery. J Med Internet Res. 2016 Jan 29;18(1):e24. doi: 10.2196/jmir.5086. v18i1e24
    1. Waring ME, Jake-Schoffman DE, Holovatska MM, Mejia C, Williams JC, Pagoto SL. Social media and obesity in adults: a review of recent research and future directions. Curr Diab Rep. 2018 Apr 18;18(6):34. doi: 10.1007/s11892-018-1001-9.10.1007/s11892-018-1001-9
    1. Chang T, Chopra V, Zhang C, Woolford SJ. The role of social media in online weight management: systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2013 Nov 28;15(11):e262. doi: 10.2196/jmir.2852. v15i11e262
    1. Maher CA, Lewis LK, Ferrar K, Marshall S, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Vandelanotte C. Are health behavior change interventions that use online social networks effective? A systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2014 Feb 14;16(2):e40. doi: 10.2196/jmir.2952. v16i2e40
    1. Laranjo L, Arguel A, Neves AL, Gallagher AM, Kaplan R, Mortimer N, Mendes GA, Lau AY. The influence of social networking sites on health behavior change: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2015 Jan;22(1):243–56. doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2014-002841. amiajnl-2014-002841
    1. Ashrafian H, Toma T, Harling L, Kerr K, Athanasiou T, Darzi A. Social networking strategies that aim to reduce obesity have achieved significant although modest results. Health Aff (Millwood) 2014 Sep;33(9):1641–7. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2014.0370.33/9/1641
    1. Willis EA, Szabo-Reed AN, Ptomey LT, Steger FL, Honas JJ, Washburn RA, Donnelly JE. Do weight management interventions delivered by online social networks effectively improve body weight, body composition, and chronic disease risk factors? A systematic review. J Telemed Telecare. 2017 Feb;23(2):263–72. doi: 10.1177/1357633X16630846. 1357633X16630846
    1. An R, Ji M, Zhang S. Effectiveness of social media-based interventions on weight-related behaviors and body weight status: review and meta-analysis. Am J Health Behav. 2017 Nov 01;41(6):670–82. doi: 10.5993/AJHB.41.6.1.
    1. Pagoto SL, Waring ME, Schneider KL, Oleski JL, Olendzki E, Hayes RB, Appelhans BM, Whited MC, Busch AM, Lemon SC. Twitter-delivered behavioral weight-loss interventions: a pilot series. JMIR Res Protoc. 2015 Oct 23;4(4):e123. doi: 10.2196/resprot.4864. v4i4e123
    1. Turner-McGrievy GM, Tate DF. Weight loss social support in 140 characters or less: use of an online social network in a remotely delivered weight loss intervention. Transl Behav Med. 2013 Sep;3(3):287–94. doi: 10.1007/s13142-012-0183-y. 183
    1. Hales SB, Davidson C, Turner-McGrievy GM. Varying social media post types differentially impacts engagement in a behavioral weight loss intervention. Transl Behav Med. 2014 Dec;4(4):355–62. doi: 10.1007/s13142-014-0274-z. 274
    1. Pagoto S, Waring M, Olendzki E, Oleski J, May C, Evans M. The feasibility of incentivizing participation in an online social network weight loss program. Proceedings of the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences; Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences; Jan 4-7, 2017; Hilton Waikoloa Village, Hawaii, USA. 2017.
    1. Cavallo DN, Sisneros JA, Ronay AA, Robbins CL, Jilcott Pitts SB, Keyserling TC, Ni A, Morrow J, Vu MB, Johnston LF, Samuel-Hodge CD. Assessing the feasibility of a web-based weight loss intervention for low-income women of reproductive age: a pilot study. JMIR Res Protoc. 2016 Feb 26;5(1):e30. doi: 10.2196/resprot.4865. v5i1e30
    1. Napolitano MA, Hayes S, Bennett GG, Ives AK, Foster GD. Using Facebook and text messaging to deliver a weight loss program to college students. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2013 Jan;21(1):25–31. doi: 10.1002/oby.20232. doi: 10.1002/oby.20232.
    1. Turner-McGrievy G, Tate D. Tweets, apps, and pods: results of the 6-month mobile pounds off digitally (mobile POD) randomized weight-loss intervention among adults. J Med Internet Res. 2011 Dec 20;13(4):e120. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1841. v13i4e120
    1. West DS, Monroe CM, Turner-McGrievy G, Sundstrom B, Larsen C, Magradey K, Wilcox S, Brandt HM. A technology-mediated behavioral weight gain prevention intervention for college students: controlled, quasi-experimental study. J Med Internet Res. 2016 Jun 13;18(6):e133. doi: 10.2196/jmir.5474. v18i6e133
    1. Herring SJ, Cruice JF, Bennett GG, Rose MZ, Davey A, Foster GD. Preventing excessive gestational weight gain among african american women: a randomized clinical trial. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2016 Jan;24(1):30–6. doi: 10.1002/oby.21240. doi: 10.1002/oby.21240.
    1. Pagoto S, Waring M, Jake-Schoffman D, Goetz J, Michaels Z, Oleski J. What Type of Engagement Predicts Success in a Facebook Weight Loss Group? Honolulu: University of Hawai'i; 2018.
    1. Kim SJ, Marsch LA, Brunette MF, Dallery J. Harnessing Facebook for smoking reduction and cessation interventions: Facebook user engagement and social support predict smoking reduction. J Med Internet Res. 2017 May 23;19(5):e168. doi: 10.2196/jmir.6681. v19i5e168
    1. Attai DJ, Cowher MS, Al-Hamadani M, Schoger JM, Staley AC, Landercasper J. Twitter social media is an effective tool for breast cancer patient education and support: patient-reported outcomes by survey. J Med Internet Res. 2015 Jul 30;17(7):e188. doi: 10.2196/jmir.4721. v17i7e188
    1. Faraj S, Johnson SL. Network exchange patterns in online communities. Org Sci. 2011 Dec;22(6):1464–80. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1100.0600.
    1. Skousen T, Safadi H, Young C, Karahanna E, Safadi S, Chebib F. Successful moderation in online patient communities: inductive case study. J Med Internet Res. 2020 Mar 17;22(3):e15983. doi: 10.2196/15983. v22i3e15983
    1. Litchman ML, Walker HR, Ng AH, Wawrzynski SE, Oser SM, Greenwood DA, Gee PM, Lackey M, Oser TK. State of the science: a scoping review and gap analysis of diabetes online communities. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2019 May;13(3):466–92. doi: 10.1177/1932296819831042.
    1. O'Hanlon CE. What kills us and what moves us: a comparative discourse analysis of heart disease and breast cancer. Digit Health. 2019;5:2055207619844865. doi: 10.1177/2055207619844865. 10.1177_2055207619844865
    1. Godino JG, Merchant G, Norman GJ, Donohue MC, Marshall SJ, Fowler JH, Calfas KJ, Huang JS, Rock CL, Griswold WG, Gupta A, Raab F, Fogg BJ, Robinson TN, Patrick K. Using social and mobile tools for weight loss in overweight and obese young adults (Project SMART): a 2 year, parallel-group, randomised, controlled trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2016 Sep;4(9):747–55. doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(16)30105-X. S2213-8587(16)30105-X
    1. Faraj S, von Krogh G, Monteiro E, Lakhani KR. Special section introduction—online community as space for knowledge flows. Inf Syst Res. 2016 Dec;27(4):668–84. doi: 10.1287/isre.2016.0682.
    1. Cooper P. How the Facebook algorithm works in 2021 and how to make it work for you. Hootsuite. 2021. [2022-03-25].
    1. Fu S, Li H, Liu Y, Pirkkalainen H, Salo M. Social media overload, exhaustion, and use discontinuance: examining the effects of information overload, system feature overload, and social overload. Inf Process Manag. 2020 Nov;57(6):102307. doi: 10.1016/j.ipm.2020.102307. doi: 10.1016/j.ipm.2020.102307.
    1. Jake-Schoffman DE, Brown SD, Baiocchi M, Bibeau JL, Daubenmier J, Ferrara A, Galarce MN, Hartogensis W, Hecht FM, Hedderson MM, Moran PJ, Pagoto SL, Tsai A, Waring ME, Kiernan M. Methods-motivational interviewing approach for enhanced retention and attendance. Am J Prev Med. 2021 Oct;61(4):606–17. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2021.04.005.S0749-3797(21)00234-8
    1. Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) Research Group The Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP): description of lifestyle intervention. Diabetes Care. 2002 Dec;25(12):2165–71. doi: 10.2337/diacare.25.12.2165.
    1. Wang ML, Waring ME, Jake-Schoffman DE, Oleski JL, Michaels Z, Goetz JM, Lemon SC, Ma Y, Pagoto SL. Clinic versus online social network-delivered lifestyle interventions: protocol for the get social noninferiority randomized controlled trial. JMIR Res Protoc. 2017 Dec 11;6(12):e243. doi: 10.2196/resprot.8068. v6i12e243
    1. Waring ME, Moore Simas TA, Oleski J, Xiao RS, Mulcahy JA, May CN, Pagoto SL. Feasibility and acceptability of delivering a postpartum weight loss intervention via facebook: a pilot study. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2018 Jan;50(1):70–4.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jneb.2017.09.025. S1499-4046(17)30944-2
    1. Pearson TA, Palaniappan LP, Artinian NT, Carnethon MR, Criqui MH, Daniels SR, Fonarow GC, Fortmann SP, Franklin BA, Galloway JM, Goff DC, Heath GW, Frank AT, Kris-Etherton PM, Labarthe DR, Murabito JM, Sacco RL, Sasson C, Turner MB, American Heart Association Council on EpidemiologyPrevention American Heart Association Guide for Improving Cardiovascular Health at the Community Level, 2013 update: a scientific statement for public health practitioners, healthcare providers, and health policy makers. Circulation. 2013 Apr 23;127(16):1730–53. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0b013e31828f8a94.CIR.0b013e31828f8a94
    1. 2008 physical activity guidelines for Americans. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. [2022-03-25]. .
    1. Wooldridge J. Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States: MIT Press; 2002.
    1. Tate DF, Valle CG, Crane MM, Nezami BT, Samuel-Hodge CD, Hatley KE, Diamond M, Polzien K. Randomized trial comparing group size of periodic in-person sessions in a remotely delivered weight loss intervention. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2017 Oct 23;14(1):144. doi: 10.1186/s12966-017-0599-3. 10.1186/s12966-017-0599-3
    1. Dutton GR, Nackers LM, Dubyak PJ, Rushing NC, Huynh TT, Tan F, Anton SD, Perri MG. A randomized trial comparing weight loss treatment delivered in large versus small groups. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2014 Sep 24;11:123. doi: 10.1186/s12966-014-0123-y. s12966-014-0123-y
    1. Pagoto SL, Schneider KL, Oleski JL, Luciani JM, Bodenlos JS, Whited MC. Male inclusion in randomized controlled trials of lifestyle weight loss interventions. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2012 Jun;20(6):1234–9. doi: 10.1038/oby.2011.140. doi: 10.1038/oby.2011.140.oby2011140
    1. Turner-McGrievy GM, Beets MW, Moore JB, Kaczynski AT, Barr-Anderson DJ, Tate DF. Comparison of traditional versus mobile app self-monitoring of physical activity and dietary intake among overweight adults participating in an mHealth weight loss program. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013 May 01;20(3):513–8. doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2012-001510. amiajnl-2012-001510
    1. Krukowski RA, Tilford JM, Harvey-Berino J, West DS. Comparing behavioral weight loss modalities: incremental cost-effectiveness of an internet-based versus an in-person condition. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2011 Aug;19(8):1629–35. doi: 10.1038/oby.2010.341. doi: 10.1038/oby.2010.341.oby2010341

Source: PubMed

Sponsorit ja yhteistyökumppanit

Sairaudet

Huumeiden interventiot

3
Tilaa