The aim of this meta-meta-analysis was to systematically review randomised controlled trial (RCT) evidence examining the effectiveness of e- and m-Health interventions designed to improve physical activity, sedentary behaviour, healthy eating and sleep. Nine electronic databases were searched for eligible studies published from inception to 1 June 2023. Systematic reviews with meta-analyses of RCTs that evaluate e- and m-Health interventions designed to improve physical activity, sedentary behaviour, sleep and healthy eating in any adult population were included. Forty-seven meta-analyses were included, comprising of 507 RCTs and 206,873 participants. Interventions involved mobile apps, web-based and SMS interventions, with 14 focused on physical activity, 3 for diet, 4 for sleep and 26 evaluating multiple behaviours. Meta-meta-analyses showed that e- and m-Health interventions resulted in improvements in steps/day (mean difference, MD = 1329 [95% CI = 593.9, 2065.7] steps/day), moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MD = 55.1 [95% CI = 13.8, 96.4] min/week), total physical activity (MD = 44.8 [95% CI = 21.6, 67.9] min/week), sedentary behaviour (MD = −426.3 [95% CI = −850.2, −2.3] min/week), fruit and vegetable consumption (MD = 0.57 [95% CI = 0.11, 1.02] servings/day), energy intake (MD = −102.9 kcals/day), saturated fat consumption (MD = −5.5 grams/day), and bodyweight (MD = −1.89 [95% CI = −2.42, −1.36] kg). Analyses based on standardised mean differences (SMD) showed improvements in sleep quality (SMD = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.40, 0.72) and insomnia severity (SMD = −0.90, 95% CI = −1.14, −0.65). Most subgroup analyses were not significant, suggesting that a variety of e- and m-Health interventions are effective across diverse age and health populations. These interventions offer scalable and accessible approaches to help individuals adopt and sustain healthier behaviours, with implications for broader public health and healthcare challenges.

Background: In the behavioral sciences, conducting pilot and/or feasibility studies (PFS) is a key step that provides essential information used to inform the design, conduct, and implementation of a larger-scale trial. There are more than 160 published guidelines, reporting checklists, frameworks, and recommendations related to PFS. All of these publications offer some form of guidance on PFS, but many focus on one or a few topics. This makes it difficult for researchers wanting to gain a broader understanding of all the relevant and important aspects of PFS and requires them to seek out multiple sources of information, which increases the risk of missing key considerations to incorporate into their PFS. The purpose of this study was to develop a consolidated set of considerations for the design, conduct, implementation, and reporting of PFS for interventions conducted in the behavioral sciences. Methods: To develop this consolidation, we undertook a review of the published guidance on PFS in combination with expert consensus (via a Delphi study) from the authors who wrote such guidance to inform the identified considerations. A total of 161 PFS-related guidelines, checklists, frameworks, and recommendations were identified via a review of recently published behavioral intervention PFS and backward/forward citation tracking of a well-known PFS literature (e.g., CONSORT Ext. for PFS). Authors of all 161 PFS publications were invited to complete a three-round Delphi survey, which was used to guide the creation of a consolidated list of considerations to guide the design, conduct, and reporting of PFS conducted by researchers in the behavioral sciences. Results: A total of 496 authors were invited to take part in the three-round Delphi survey (round 1, N = 46; round 2, N = 24; round 3, N = 22). A set of twenty considerations, broadly categorized into six themes (intervention design, study design, conduct of trial, implementation of intervention, statistical analysis, and reporting) were generated from a review of the 161 PFS-related publications as well as a synthesis of feedback from the three-round Delphi process. These 20 considerations are presented alongside a supporting narrative for each consideration as well as a crosswalk of all 161 publications aligned with each consideration for further reading. Conclusion: We leveraged expert opinion from researchers who have published PFS-related guidelines, checklists, frameworks, and recommendations on a wide range of topics and distilled this knowledge into a valuable and universal resource for researchers conducting PFS. Researchers may use these considerations alongside the previously published literature to guide decisions about all aspects of PFS, with the hope of creating and disseminating interventions with broad public health impact.

Physical activity, screen use, and sleep are behaviors that integrate across the whole day. However, the accumulative influence of meeting recommendations for these 24-h movement behaviors on the mental health of Alaskan adolescents has not been examined. The purpose of this study was to examine the associations between movement behaviors, loneliness, and sadness within Alaskan adolescents. Data were obtained from the 2019 Alaska Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS). The number of adolescents participating in the 2019 Alaska YRBS was 1897. Associations between meeting recommendations for movement behaviors with loneliness and sadness were examined using weighted logistic regression models, adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, and body mass index (BMI). Approximately 5.0% of the sample met recommendations for all three movement behaviors. Meeting 2 or 3 movement behavior recommendations was associated with lower odds of loneliness (odds ratio (OR) range = 0.23 to 0.44, p < 0.01). Additionally, meeting 1 to 3 movement behavior recommendations was associated with lower odds of sadness (OR range = 0.29 to 0.52, p < 0.05). Joint association analyses determined that these relationships were primarily driven by meeting the sleep recommendation for loneliness and meeting the screen use recommendation for sadness. The results support use of multiple movement-based behavior programming to attenuate feelings of loneliness and sadness within Alaskan adolescents.

This study sought to examine associations between (a) sports team participation; (b) lifestyle behaviors (e.g., sleeping, alcohol, and tobacco use); and (c) dietary behaviors with self-reported academic achievement using data derived from the 2017 U.S. National Youth Risk Behavior Survey. A multistage cluster sampling procedure was employed to obtain a representative sample of U.S. adolescents from among whom the number with usable data was 14,765. We used weighted logistic regression models to examine the associations between sports participation, lifestyle behaviors, and diet with reported academic achievement (mostly A’s and B’s), adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, and race/ethnicity. After controlling for lifestyle behaviors, diet, and other potentially confounding variables, we found that adolescents participating in one or more sport teams throughout the past year also reported higher academic achievement (A’s and B’s) compared with adolescents participating in zero sports teams (odds ratio [OR] = 1.39 to 2.40, p < .001). This relationship was dose-dependent, as participating in multiple sports teams (i.e., > 3) showed a stronger association with academic achievement than participating on only one sports team (p < .001). Other independent behavioral correlates with similarly high grades included daily breakfast consumption (OR = 1.40, p < .001), sleeping at least eight hours per night (OR = 1.21, p < .001), and regular consumption of vegetables (OR = 1.56, p < .001) and salads (OR = 1.30, p < .001). We discuss the meaning and implication of these findings.