| Cadmus-Bertram et al [78], 2016, Fitbit-based intervention (activity tracker and app-based website) |
|
A total of 96% (24/25) of midlife women liked the Fitbit app-based website.
There were lower perceived barriers associated with the use of Fitbit; 80% (20/25) reported no technical issues or difficulty with the trackers.
A total of 96% (24/25) rated Fitbit as “somewhat or very helpful” for increasing PAb compared with only 32% in the pedometer control group.
A total of 76% (19/25) reported that they would recommend Fitbit to a friend.
|
| Valle et al [81], 2017, weight loss mobile intervention (tracker and app) |
|
|
| Butryn et al [79], 2016, Fitbit-based intervention (tracker and app) |
|
At 6 months, 89% (25/28) of the participants rated the whole program as favorable for increasing PA on a 5-point Likert scale (mean 4.11 out of 5, SD 1.14). The Fitbit was reported as the “best part.”
After the intervention ended, 88% (24/28) reported confidence in the ability to maintain PA over the next 3 months.
At 6 months, 77% (22/28) reported that they had purchased or intended to purchase a device.
In total, 88% (24/28) agreed to recommend the program to others.
|
| Sengupta et al [84], 2020, HerBeat mobile app and smartwatch |
|
Midlife women found the app features to be easy to use and well integrated (mean score on the SUS was 83.60, SD 16.4).
Participants somehow felt confident in using the app.
The most frequent technical complaints were regarding the short battery life of the smartwatch.
Participants had no adverse events or privacy concerns.
|
| Joseph et al [56], 2021, Fitbit-based intervention (tracker and app) |
|
Treatment acceptance was measured using an adapted consumer satisfaction survey to assess users’ perceptions of the intervention’s content, app usability, and preferences.
A total of 87% (13/15) of the women found the combined use of the Fitbit app and activity tracker helpful and “motivational to exercise.”
|