ArticlePreventive medicine reports2025
Behaviour change techniques, intervention features and usability of diet apps.
Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Identify the behaviour change techniques and intervention features in popular diet apps. Methods: The most popular diet apps were identified from the top 200 ranked apps in the Health & Fitness sections of the App Store and Google Play in September 2023. Selected apps were used for one week and their content analysed for the presence of behaviour change techniques and intervention features. Apps were rated using the Mobile App Rating Scale score. Results: Thirteen apps with 23 app versions (free & premium) were included. The mean number of behaviour change techniques was 18.3 ± 5.8. The most frequently coded behaviour change techniques were predominantly from the 'Goals and planning' and 'Feedback and monitoring' categories. Apps contained 21.1 ± 6.1 intervention features and scored a mean Mobile App Rating Scale rating of 3.8 ± 0.3. There was a strong, statistically significant correlation ( Conclusions: Selected apps contained a high number of behaviour change techniques and intervention features. Most included apps lacked an evidence base and safety features. App engagement, optimal use of time, safety features and app ranking systems require further research to provide evidence-based recommendations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.