Evidence Table 9

Description of consumer characteristics in RCTs addressing KQ 1b (impact of CHI applications on intermediate outcomes)

Author,yearControl InterventionsAgeRace, n(%)IncomeEducation, n(%)SESGender, n (%)Marital Status, n(%)Other
diet/exercise/physical activity NOT obesity
Adachi, 20071ControlMean, 46.3 SD, 8.6NSNSNSNRHeight (cm): mean, 157.6 SD, 5.9
Body weight (kg): mean, 65.1 SD, 6.4
BMI (kg/m2): mean, 26.1 SD, 1.6
Behavioral weight control program with 6-month weight and targeted behavior’s self-monitoringMean, 46.6 SD, 10.1NSNSNSNRHeight: mean, 157.5 SD, 6.1
Body weight (kg): mean, 65.3 SD, 6.4
BMI (kg/m2): mean, 26.2 SD, 1.4
Untailored self-help booklet with 7-month self monitoringMean, 46.6 SD, 9NSNSNSNRHeight: mean, 155.7 SD, 5.2
Body weight (kg): mean, 63.4 SD, 5.5
BMI (kg/m2): mean, 26.1 SD, 1.5
Behavioral weight control programMean, 45.3 SD, 10.4NSNSNSNRHeight: mean, 157.0 SD, 5.5
Body weight (kg): mean, 64.8 SD, 6.5
BMI (kg/m2): mean 26. SD, 1.5
Anderson, 20012ControlNSNSNSNSNSNS
InterventionNSNSNSNSNSNS
Sample statisticsNSWhite (92)Median annual $35,000; $20,000 or less (12)Mean years of education 14.78±2.11; 12 years or fewer (20)NSF (96).70 children (SD 1.00, p<.001)
Brug, 19983Control-General InformationNSNSNSNSNSNSNS
Tailored Feedback; Tailored + Iterative FeedbackNSNSNSNSNSNSNS
Baseline Statistics44 (SD 14) years.NSNSCollege degree (42)NSF (82)Mean body mass index was 23.7 (SD 5.9) for women and 24.6 (SD 3.7) for men.; mean fat score at baseline was 27.2 (SD 5.2); mean number of daily servings of vegetables and fruit were 1.0 (SD 0.4) and 2.2 (SD 1.7), respectively. Mean attitude scores at baseline (on a -3 to 3 scale) were 2.0 (SD 1.4) toward fat reduction and 2.5 (SD 0.8) and 2.3'(SD 0.9) toward increasing vegetables and fruit. Self-efficacy (range -3 to 3) expectations were 0.6 (SD 1.8), 1.3 (SD 1.7), and 1.2 (SD 1.9) toward reducing fat and increasing vegetables and fruit, respectively.
Brug, 19994Comparison 163M 41.3NSNSNSNSNSBMI 23.9
Experimental 152M 38.6NSNSNSNSNSBMI 24.2
Campbell, 19945No messages (124)NSNSNSNSNSNSNS
Tailored messages (134)NSNSNSNSNSNSNS
Non-tailored messages (136)NSNSNSNSNSNSNS
Baseline characteristicsAverage age of 40.8 yearsMinority enrollment (19.0)Median annual household level was $30 000 to $39 000,(mean 13.6 years),NSF (75.3)NS
Campbell, 19996Control 21228.9 (0.59)Caucasian 10.8
African-American 82.1
Hispanic 1.9
American Indian 1.9
other ethnicity 3.3
NSLess than high school (33.0)
high school graduate or GED ( 36.3)
beyond high school (30.7)
NSNSMean child number (SE) 2.1 (0.09)
High autonomy (71.2)
Feel need to lose weight (62.3)
Intervention 16530.2 (0.67)Caucasian 7.3
African-American 87.3
Hispanic 1.2
American Indian 0.6
other ethnicity 3.6
NSLess than high school (33.9)
High school graduate or GED (37.0)
beyond high school (29.1)
NSNSMean child number (SE) 2.2 (0.10)
High autonomy (77.0)
Feel need to lose weight (59.4)
Campbell, 20047Control-No intervention (166)27.5 (8.6)African American 26.7;
White non-Hispanic 60.6; Other 12.7
NSHigh school 17.1; High school or GED 67.1; Beyond high school (any trade/beauty school/college) 15.8NSF(97)Pregnant (19), Breast-feeding (5);
Number of children, mean (SD) 2.0 (1.1)
Computer tailored interactive nutrition education (141)27.3 (7.9)African American 39.7; White non-Hispanic 48.9; Other 12.7NSHigh school 21.3; High school or GED 66.7; Beyond high school (any trade/beauty school/college)
12.0
NSF(98)Pregnant (23); Breast-feeding (4) Number of children, mean (SD) 1.9 (1.0)
Haerens, 20058Control condition (n 5 schools, 759 pupils)12.85 (0.71)NSNSNSLower SES (52.4)Girls (58.8)NS
Intervention with parental support(n schools, 1226 pupils)13.04 (0.79)NSNSNSLower SES (68.0)Girls (40.1)NS
Intervention alone (n 5 schools, 1006 pupils)13.24 (0.87)NSNSNSLower SES (78.9)Girls (15.6)NS
Haerens, 20079No interventionMean, 13.2 SD, 0.5NSNSGeneral, 84 (55.6)
Technical-vocational, 67 (44.4)
NRF,111 (73.5)
M,40 (26.5)
Stage of change: Pre-contemplation, 36 (24.8)
Contemplation, 8 (5.5)
Preparation, 12 (8.3)
Action, 34 (23.4)
Maintenance, 55 (37.9)
Dietary fat intake: mean, 113.9 SD, 46.3
InterventionMean, 13.3 SD, 0.5NSNSGeneral, 90 (58.8)
Technical-vocational, 63 (41.2)
NRF,103 (67.3)
M, 50 (32.7)
Stage of change: Pre-contemplation, 42 (28.2)
Contemplation,4 (2.7)
Preparation ,11 (7.4)
Action, 44 (29.5)
Maintenance, 48 (32.2)
Dietary fat intake: mean, 116.3 SD, 50.1
Haerens, 200910Control- Generic feedback informationNSNSNSNSNSNSNS
Computer tailored feed backNSNSNSNSNSNSNS
Baseline Characteristics14.6 _ (1.2)NSNSNSNS(526 boys, 645 girlsNS
Hurling, 200611Control 22M 34.9NSNSNSNSF 78NS
Intervention 25M 34.0NSNSNSNSF72NS
Hurling, 200712No interventionMean, 40.1 SD, 7.7White non-Hispanic, (97)NSNSNRF, (70)Household broadband access: yes, (22)
Weight in kg: mean, 73.9 SD, 10.2
BMI: mean, 26.5 SD, 4.1
Initial IPAQ
self0report level of physical activity (MET min): mean, 3868SD, 2257
Internet and mobile phone interventionMean, 40.5 SD, 7.1White non-Hispanic, (100)NSNSNRF (64)Household broadband access: Yes, (29) Weight in kg: mean, 75.1 SD, 11.7
BMI: mean, 166.3 SD, 6.6
Initial IPAQ self0report level of physical activity (MET min): mean, 4350 SD, 3200
King, 200613Generic health risk appraisal CD-ROM61.0 (11.0)Hispanic (8.2) White (79.1)Income Less than $10,000
5.3
$10,000 to $29,999
20.0
$30,000 to $49,999
35.3
$50,000 to $69,999
18.7
$70,000 to $89,999
12.0
$90,000 or more 11.9
Completed high school (27.4)
Technical school (37.6)
Completed college (22.9)
Graduate degree (12.1)
NSF(51.3)Married (63.7); Taking insulin (19.1); Body mass index (kg/m2) (M, SD)) 31.9 (7.2); Comorbiditiesd (M, SD) 3.1 (2.1); Smokers 11.9
Interactive CD-ROM61.9 (11.7)Hispanic (17.4) White (74.3)Income
Less than $10,000
4.8
$10,000 to $29,999
24.8
$30,000 to $49,999
27.0
$50,000 to $69,999
20.0
$70,000 to $89,999
9.7
$90,000 or more 8.2
Completed high school (27.4)
Technical school (37.6)
Completed college (22.9)
Graduate degree (12.1)
NSF(50.0)Married (67.8); Taking insulin (24.7); Body mass index (kg/m2) (M, SD) 31.4 (7.0) ; Comorbiditiesd (M, SD) 2.9 (1.9) ; Smokers (8.2)
Kristal, 200014Usual Care (730)NSNSNSNSNSNSNS
Intervention (729)NSNSNSNSNSNSNS
Base line characteristics44.9 ± 14.9White 85.9; Black 4.5; Asian 5.8; Hispanic 3.0; Other 0.8(%, $1,000),<25 (12.2); 25–34 16.9; 35–49 25.4; 50–69 23.7; 701 21.7NSNSM (50.9)Body mass index (x 6 SD) 26.5 6 5.0
Lewis, 200815Standard InternetNSNSNSNSNSNSNS
Motivationally-Tailored InternetNSNSNSNSNSNSNS
Baseline StatisticsNSCaucasian (76.3)NSNSNSWomen (82.7)NS
Low, 200616ControlNSStudents of color (8.4)NSNSNRNS
Student bodies with a moderated discussionNSNSNSNSNRF (100)NS
Student bodies with a un-moderated discussionNSNSNSNSNRF (100)NS
Mangunkusumo, 200717InternetMean, 15
range, 13-17
Dutch, (76.5)
Turkish (5.0)
Moroccan (3.3)
Surinamese (2.4)
Antillean/Arubans (0.4)
Other (12.3)
NSNSNRM, (43.9)Lower secondary/vocational, (59.1)
Int. secondary, (18.6)
Upper secondary, (22.3)
ControlNSNSNSNSNRNSNS
Marcus, 200718Control46.3 (9.4)NSNSNSNRNS
Tailored printMean, 445 SD, 9.6White non-Hispanic, (77.9)USD >50,000, (57.0)College graduate (or doing post graduate work), (72.1)NRF, (83.7)Married, (69.8)BMI: mean, 29.1 SD, 6.2
Employment: employed, (80.2)
Tailored internetMean, 44.5 SD, 9White non-Hispanic, (82.7)USD >50,000, (58.0)College graduate (or doing post graduate work), (64.2)NRF, (81.5)Married, (63.0)BMI: mean, 29.7 SD, 6.5
Employment: employed, (90.0)
Control46.3 (9.4White non-Hispanic, (84.1)USD >50,000, (53.7)College graduate (or doing post graduate work), (64.6)NRF, (82.9)Married, (55.6)BMI: mean, 29.5 SD, 5.5
Employment status: employed, (89.0)
Napolitano, 200319Wait list control groupNSNSNSNSNRNS
InternetNSNSNSNSNRNS
Oenema, 200120Non-tailored nutrition information letterNSNSNSNSNRNS
Web based tailored nutrition educationNSNSNSNSNRNS
Richardson, 200721Lifestyle Goals (LG) Group (17)52 ± 12White (76), Black (18), Other (6)<30,000 (18), 30,000-70,000 (18), >70,000(65)HS diploma or GED (6), Some college (47), College degree (18), Graduate degree (29)NSM (29) F(71)Baseline Average
Daily Step Count 4,157 ± 1,737; Baseline BMI 38.6 ± 8.2.; Baseline Blood Pressure
Systolic 133 ± 18, Diastolic 80 ± 9; On Insulin
No (88), Yes (12); Internet Usage (Home)
Never (6), ≤ 4 times per month (12), Several times a week (12),Almost every day (65)
Structured Goals (SG) Group (13)53 ± 9White (77), Black (8), Other (15)<30,000(8), 30,000-70,000 (31), >70,000 (62)HS diploma or GED (8), Some college (15), College degree (46), Graduate degree (31)NSM (38) F(62)Baseline Average Daily Step Count 5,171 ± 1,769; Baseline BMI 35.3 ± 8.6.; Baseline Blood Pressure
Systolic 136 ± 12, Diastolic 82 ± 11; On Insulin
No (69), Yes (31); Internet Usage (Home)
Never (23), ≤ 4 times per month (8), Several times a week (23),Almost every day (46)
Smeets, 200722Control group receiving one general information letterRange, 18-65 Mean, 47 SD, 11NSNSPrimary or basic vocational school(10), Secondary vocational level or high school degree (42), Higher vocational school, college degree, or university degree(48)NRF (57)NS
Computer generated tailored newsletterNSNSNSNSNRNSNS
Spittaels, 200723No InterventionAge in years 40.7 (5.3)NSNSHigher education 72.7NSF(66.7)Employed 87.8; Compliance with PA recommendations 37.9; Stages of change
Precontemplation 6.1
Contemplation 19.8
Preparation 36.6
Action 8.4
Maintenance 29.0;
BMI in kg/m2 24.1 (3.5);
PA at moderate intensity in min/day 30.9 (36.4)
Website with computer tailored feedbackAge in years 43.3 (5.7)NSNSHigher education 61.9NSF (65.3)Employed 86.2 ; Compliance with PA recommendations 47.4; Stages of change
Precontemplation 3.5 Contemplation 8.7
Preparation 40.5
Action 11.6
Maintenance 35.8; BMI in kg/m2 25.0 (3.7);
PA at moderate intensity in min/day 40.9 (40.5)
Website without computer tailored feedbackAge in years 39.6 (5.0)NSNSHigher education 67.4NSF (66.7)Employed 84.5 ; Compliance with PA recommendations 44.2 ; Stages of change
Precontemplation 6.2
Contemplation 15.5
Preparation 34.1 Action 12.4
Maintenance 31.8 ; BMI in kg/m2 24.6 (3.6) ;
PA at moderate intensity in min/day 39.5 (42.3)
Spittaels, 200724Standard adviceRange, 25-55
mean, 40.9 SD, 8
NSNSCollege or university degree(59.6)NRF (27)BMI: mean, 24.4 SD, 3.1
Work status:
Factory workers (22)
Office workers (51)
Managers (27)
Stages of Change: Pre-contemplation (10.7)
Contemplation (17.9)
Preparation (10.7)
Action (10.0)
Maintenance (49.3)
Tailored advice + emailRange, 5-55
mean, 39.7 SD, 8.9
NSNSCollege or university degree(63.4 )NRF (38.8)BMI:
mean, 24.3 SD, 3
Work status:
Factory workers (22.4)
Office workers (60.3)
Managers (17.2)
Stages of Change:
Pre-contemplation (6.9)
Contemplation (13.8)
Preparation (11.2)
Action (12.9)
Maintenance (55.2)
Tailored adviceRange, 25-55
mean, 39.3 SD, 8.7
NSNSCollege or university degree(68.9)NRF (32)BMI: mean, 24.4 SD, 3.5
Work status:
Factory workers (21.3)
Office workers (51.6)
Managers (27.0)
Stages of Change:
Pre-contemplation (7.6)
Contemplation (13.4)
Preparation (10.1)
Action (16.0)
Maintenance (52.9)
Tan, 200525No informationNSNSNSNSNRNS
Tailored InformationNSNSNSNSNRNS
Tate, 200626No counselingMean, 49.9 SD, 8.3Minority 6(9)NSCollege graduate(49)NRF: 55, (82)49 (73)Weight: mean, 88.3 (13.9)
body mass index: 32.3 (3.7)
internet experiences, y: 4.7 (2.9)
Waist circumference, cm: 106.4 (11.3)
Weekly internet use, h: 4.5 (4.9)
Human email counselingMean, 47.9 SD, 11.4Minority 8(13)NSCollege graduate(56)NRF: 54,( 84)53(83)Weight: mean, 89.0 (13.0)
body mass index: 32.8 (3.4)
internet experiences, y: 4.1 (2.3)
Waist circumference, cm: 107.4 (10.8)
Weekly internet use, h: 4.7 (5.3)
Automated feedbackMean, 47.9 SD, 9.8Minority 6(10)NSCollege graduate (59)NRF: 53,( 87)46(75)Weight: mean, 89.0 (13.2)
body mass index:
32.7 (3.5)
internet experiences, y:
4.4 (2.2)
Waist circumference, cm: 107.6 (11.2)
Weekly internet use, h: 5.0 (4.2)
Vandelanotte, 200527ControlNSNSNSNSNRNSNS
Sequential Interactive computer tailored interventionNSNSNSNSNRNSNS
Simultaneous interactive computer tailored interventionNSNSNSNSNRNSNS
Verheijden, 200428Usual careMean, 64 SD, 10NSNS≤ High school13 (18) , Intermediate22 (30), ≥ B.Sc. level38 (52)NRM: 43 (59) F: 30 (41)Lifestyle:
Never smoke:28 (39)
Ex-smoker: 38 (52)
Current smoker: 7 (9)
Alcohol >3 glasses/wk: 39 (54) mean, Exercise >3 times/wk: 45 (61)
Medication use:
HTN: 49 (67)
Dyslipidemia:23 (31)
DM type 2: 13 (18)
Stage of Change: Pre-contemplation: 12 (16)
Contemplation: 4 (5)
Preparation: 5 (7)
Action: 3 (4) mean Maintenance: 50 (68)
Web-Based Targeted Nutrition Counseling and Social SupportMean, 62 SD, 11NSNS≤ High school 15 (21), Intermediate 31 (42), ≥ B.Sc. level27 (37)NRM: 38 (52)
F: 35 (48)
Lifestyle: Never smoker: 26 (35)
Ex-smoker: 37 (51)
Current smoker: 10 (14)
Alcohol>3 glasses/wk: 41 (56) mean, Exercise>3 wks/wk: 46 (63)
Medication use:
HTN: 49 (67)
Dyslipidemia: 26 (35)
DM type 2: 9(13)
Stage of change:
Pre-contemplation:
11 (15)
Contemplation: 2 (3)
Preparation: 7 (1)
Action: 9 (13)
mean, Maintenance: 50 (68)
Wylie-Rosett, 200129Work book only52.5± 11.50White 100(86.2)NSEducation>1 yr in college 99 (85.3)NSF 88 (75.7)NS
Computer tailored feedback52.7± 11.27White 195 (82.6)NSEducation>1 yr in college 193 (81.8)NSF 199 (84.3)NS
computer tailored feedback plus staff consultation51.6± 12.14White 193 (81.8)NSEducation>1 yr in college 192 (85.6)NSF 197 (83.5)NS
Eating disorder
Bruge, 199630Non-tailored groupMean, 39 SD, 8NSNSUniversity training (34)
Technical degree (59)
Less than high school (7)
NRM (83)Fat consumption/day:
28.0(5.3)
Vegetable servings/day: 1.00 (0.31)
Fruit servings/day:
1.61(1.14)
Intervention groupNSNSNSNSNRNSNS
Silk, 200831Video gameMean, 33, SD, 8.28European American (68)
African American (25)
Latino (5)
Asian (1)
Other (1)
Yearly income less or equal to (185) of federal index:
(100)
Less than college (87)
High school or GED equivalent (44)
NRF (100)NS
Web siteNSNSNSNSNRNSNS
DefineNSNSNSNSNRNSNS
Winzelberg, 200032No interventionMean, 20 range, 18–33 SD, 2.8White non-Hispanic, (53)
Black non-Hispanic, (3)
Latino/Hispanic, (35)
API, (5)
Other, (3)
NSNSNRF (100)NS
InterventionNSNSNSNSNRNSNS
Overweight and binge eating
Jones, 200833Wait list control groupMean, 15.2 SD, 1.1White non-Hispanic, 32
Black non-Hispanic, 6
Latino/Hispanic, 10
API, Other, 5
NSGrade in school, n: 9th, 20
10th, 19
11th, 13
12th, 1
NRF, 35
M, 18
Born in United States (92)
BMI: mean, 30.64
SD, 5.97
SB2-BEDMean, 15 SD, 1White non-Hispanic, 35
Black non-Hispanic, 2
Latino/Hispanic, 12
Other, 3
NSGrade in school, n:
9th 26
10th 16
11th 10
12th 0
NRF, 38
M, 14
Born in United States :(96)
BMI: mean, 30.58
SD, 4.9

NR= Not Reported, NS= Not Specified, SD= Standard Deviation, SES= Socioeconomic Status, Yr= year, CBT= Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, WL= Wait List,

BMI= Body Mass Index, QOL= Quality of Life, USD= United States Dollars, Female = F, Male = M, AIAN = American Indian/Alaska Native

Reference List

1

Adachi Y, Sato C, Yamatsu K, Ito S, Adachi K, Yamagami T. A randomized controlled trial on the long-term effects of a 1-month behavioral weight control program assisted by computer tailored advice. Behav Res Ther 2007; 45(3):459–70.

2

Anderson ES, Winett RA, Wojcik JR, Winett SG, Bowden T. A computerized social cognitive intervention for nutrition behavior: Direct and mediated effects on fat, fiber, fruits, and vegetables, self-efficacy, and outcome expectations among food shoppers. 2001; 23(2):88–100.

3

Brug J, Glanz K, Van Assema P, Kok G, Van Breukelen GJP. The Impact of Computer-Tailored Feedback and Iterative Feedback on Fat, Fruit, and Vegetable Intake. 1998; 25(4):517–31.

4

Brug J, Steenhuis I, Van Assema P, Glanz K, De Vries H. Computer-tailored nutrition education: Differences between two interventions. 1999; 14(2):249–56.

5

Dickerson S, Reinhart AM, Feeley TH et al. Patient Internet use for health information at three urban primary care clinics. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2004; 11(6):499–504.

6

Campbell MK, Honess-Morreale L, Farrell D, Carbone E, Brasure M. A tailored multimedia nutrition education pilot program for low-income women receiving food assistance. 1999; 14(2):257–67.

7

Campbell MK, Carbone E, Honess-Morreale L, Heisler-MacKinnon J, Demissie S, Farrell D. Randomized trial of a tailored nutrition education CD-ROM program for women receiving food assistance. 2004; 36(2):58–66.

8

Haerens L, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Maes L, Vereecken C, Brug J, Deforche B. The effects of a middle-school healthy eating intervention on adolescents' fat and fruit intake and soft drinks consumption. 2007; 10(5):443–9.

9

Haerens L, Deforche B, Maes L, Brug J, Vandelanotte C, De Bourdeaudhuij I. A computer-tailored dietary fat intake intervention for adolescents: results of a randomized controlled trial. Ann Behav Med 2007; 34(3):253–62.

10

Haerens L, Maes L, Vereecken C, De Henauw S, Moreno L, De Bourdeaudhuij I. Effectiveness of a computer tailored physical activity intervention in adolescents compared to a generic advice. Patient Educ Couns 2009.

11

Hurling R, Fairley BW, Dias MB. Internet-based exercise intervention systems: Are more interactive designs better? 2006; 21(6):757–72.

12

Hurling R, Catt M, Boni MD et al. Using internet and mobile phone technology to deliver an automated physical activity program: randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res 2007; 9(2):e7.

13

King DK, Estabrooks PA, Strycker LA, Toobert DJ, Bull SS, Glasgow RE. Outcomes of a multifaceted physical activity regimen as part of a diabetes self-management intervention. 2006; 31(2):128–37.

14

Kristal AR, Curry SJ, Shattuck AL, Feng Z, Li S. A randomized trial of a tailored, self-help dietary intervention: The puget sound eating patterns study. 2000; 31(4):380–9.

15

Lewis B, Williams D, Dunsiger S et al. User attitudes towards physical activity websites in a randomized controlled trial. Prev Med 2008; 47(5):508–13.

16

Low KG, Charanasomboon S, Lesser J et al. Effectiveness of a computer-based interactive eating disorders prevention program at long-term follow-up. Eat Disord 2006; 14(1):17–30.

17

Mangunkusumo R, Brug J, Duisterhout J, de Koning H, Raat H. Feasibility, acceptability, and quality of Internet-administered adolescent health promotion in a preventive-care setting. Health Educ Res 2007; 22(1):1–13.

18

Marcus BH, Lewis BA, Williams DM et al. A comparison of Internet and print-based physical activity interventions. Arch Intern Med 2007; 167(9):944–9.

19

Napolitano MA, Fotheringham M, Tate D et al. Evaluation of an internet-based physical activity intervention: a preliminary investigation. Ann Behav Med 2003; 25(2):92–9.

20

Oenema A, Brug J, Lechner L. Web-based tailored nutrition education: results of a randomized controlled trial. Health Educ Res 2001; 16(6):647–60.

21

Richardson CR, Mehari KS, McIntyre LG et al. A randomized trial comparing structured and lifestyle goals in an internet-mediated walking program for people with type 2 diabetes. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2007; 4:59.

22

Smeets T, Kremers SP, Brug J, de Vries H. Effects of tailored feedback on multiple health behaviors. Ann Behav Med 2007; 33(2):117–23.

23

Spittaels H, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Vandelanotte C. Evaluation of a website-delivered computer-tailored intervention for increasing physical activity in the general population. 2007; 44(3):209–17.

24

Spittaels H, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Brug J, Vandelanotte C. Effectiveness of an online computer-tailored physical activity intervention in a real-life setting. Health Educ Res 2007; 22(3):385–96.

25

Oenema A, Tan F, Brug J. Short-term efficacy of a web-based computer-tailored nutrition intervention: main effects and mediators. Ann Behav Med 2005; 29(1):54–63.

26

Tate DF, Jackvony EH, Wing RR. A randomized trial comparing human e-mail counseling, computer-automated tailored counseling, and no counseling in an Internet weight loss program. Arch Intern Med 2006; 166(15):1620–5.

27

Vandelanotte C, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Sallis JF, Spittaels H, Brug J. Efficacy of sequential or simultaneous interactive computer-tailored interventions for increasing physical activity and decreasing fat intake. Ann Behav Med 2005; 29(2):138–46.

28

Verheijden M, Bakx JC, Akkermans R et al. Web-based targeted nutrition counselling and social support for patients at increased cardiovascular risk in general practice: randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res 2004; 6(4):e44.

29

Wylie-Rosett J, Swencionis C, Ginsberg M et al. Computerized weight loss intervention optimizes staff time: The clinical and cost results of a controlled clinical trial conducted in a managed care setting. 2001; 101(10):1155–62.

30

Brug J, Steenhuis I, Van Assema P, De Vries H. The impact of a computer-tailored nutrition intervention. 1996; 25(3):236–42.

31

Silk KJ, Sherry J, Winn B, Keesecker N, Horodynski MA, Sayir A. Increasing nutrition literacy: testing the effectiveness of print, web site, and game modalities. J Nutr Educ Behav 2008; 40(1):3–10.

32

Winzelberg AJ, Eppstein D, Eldredge KL et al. Effectiveness of an Internet-based program for reducing risk factors for eating disorders. J Consult Clin Psychol 2000; 68(2):346–50.

33

Jones M, Luce KH, Osborne MI et al. Randomized, controlled trial of an internet-facilitated intervention for reducing binge eating and overweight in adolescents. Pediatrics 2008; 121(3):453–62.

From: Appendix G

Cover of Impact of Consumer Health Informatics Applications
Impact of Consumer Health Informatics Applications.
Evidence Reports/Technology Assessments, No. 188.
Gibbons MC, Wilson RF, Samal L, et al.

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.