A smartphone application as a personalized treatment tool for adolescents with overweight: an explorative qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The present study is the first step of a 3-year European project in which a tailored smartphone application will be developed and tested as a potential tool in the personalized treatment of children and adolescents with overweight. METHODS: In this study, 10 focus groups (n = 48 participants) were conducted in Belgium, The Netherlands and France with adolescents with overweight (12-16 years; n = 30) and parents of adolescents with overweight (n = 18) to investigate their perceptions on (un)healthy behavior, the drivers of these behaviors, and the needs of an eHealth application for weight loss. A thorough thematic analysis was performed using Nvivo12. RESULTS: Results show that adolescents with overweight have a well-articulated perspective on (un)healthy behavior and their needs. Parents underestimate their own influence on the (un)healthy behavior of their children and report difficulties in healthy lifestyle parenting, which makes their role as a coach rather ambiguous. Concerning the needs of an eHealth application, both parents and adolescents formulated some challenging expectations regarding the content and the format including information, a monitoring feature and features that increase participants' motivation to behave healthy. The results of this analysis will form the basis for designing a personalized eHealth application, which will be tested in a next phase. CONCLUSION: We can conclude that adolescents have a well-articulated perspective on healthy and unhealthy behavior and their needs, whereby a new app could be of great help. It could function as a day-by-day diary and as a supportive coach.

Just-in-Time, but Still Planned: Lessons Learned From Speeding up the Development and Implementation of an Intervention to Promote COVID-19 Vaccination in University Students.

The process of developing a behavior change intervention can cover a long time period. However, in times of need, this development process has to be more efficient and without losing the scientific rigor. In this article, we describe the just-in-time, planned development of an online intervention in the field of higher education, promoting COVID-19 vaccination among university students, just before they were eligible for being vaccinated. We demonstrate how intervention development can happen fast but with sufficient empirical and theoretical support. In the developmental process, Intervention Mapping (IM) helped with decision-making in every step. We learned that the whole process is primarily depending on the trust of those in charge in the quality of the program developers. Moreover, it is about applying theory, not about theory-testing. As there was no COVID-19-related evidence available, evidence from related fields helped as did theoretical knowledge about change processes, next to having easy access to the target population and important stakeholders for informed qualitative and quantitative research. This project was executed under unavoidable time pressure. IM helped us with systematically developing an intervention, just-in-time to positively affect vaccine acceptance among university students.

Demystifying Open Science in health psychology and behavioral medicine: a practical guide to Registered Reports and Data Notes.

Open Science practices are integral to increasing transparency, reproducibility, and accessibility of research in health psychology and behavioral medicine. Drives to facilitate Open Science practices are becoming increasingly evident in journal editorial policies, including the establishment of new paper formats such as Registered Reports and Data Notes. This paper provides: (i) an overview of the current state of Open Science policies within health psychology and behavioral medicine, (ii) a call for submissions to an Article Collection of Registered Reports and Data Notes as new paper formats within the journal of Health Psychology & Behavioral Medicine, (iii) an overview of Registered Reports and Data Notes, and (iv) practical considerations for authors and reviewers of Registered Reports and Data Notes.

Investigation of the effects of mineral elements on flower coloration of plants growing in different habitats (limestone, serpentine, gypsum).

In this study, 25 plant species growing in different habitats in Erzincan province were studied with gypsum (Ebenus macrophylla, Gypsophila lepidioides, Linum flavum, Onobrychis nitida, Paracaryum stenolophum, Psephellus recepii, Tanacetum heterotomum, Verbascum alyssifolium), limestone (Alkanna megacarpa, Alyssum sibiricum, Anthemis sp., Astragalus sp., Chrysophthalmum montanum, Ebenus laguroides, Genista aucheri, Pelargonium endlicherianum, Stachys sparsipilosa), or serpentine (Artedia squamata, Consolida olopetala, Convolvulus pseudoscammania, Erysimum pulchellum, Fumana aciphylla, Gladiolus halophilus, Hypericum thymbrifolium, Salvia indica). Within the scope of the study, element concentrations were determined in plants with different flower colors (yellow, purple-blue-pink, white) and in the soils where they grow. Our goal was to assess whether there were differences in mineral element concentrations within plants from these different areas and whether those differences (if they existed) led to changes in plant morphology, specifically flower coloration. The flowers, leaves and root parts of the collected plants and the soils of the habitats where they grow were pre-treated in the laboratory. Mineral element concentrations in the prepared samples were determined by ICP-MS. Plant and soil data obtained were statistically evaluated, and the differences between the habitats were determined. It was observed that there were differences in terms of mineral elements in the generative and vegetative parts of the plant and these differences impacted flower color; these coloration differences in plants from other areas might be used to indicate the presence of potentially important minerals.

A Safe Return to Campus in Times of COVID-19: A Survey Study among University Personnel to Inform Decision Makers.

Halfway through 2021 in the midst of a public health crisis, a new academic year was fast approaching. Dutch universities were preparing to reopen their campuses to students and personnel in a safe manner. As the vaccination uptake was increasing and societies were slowly reopening, inviting students and personnel to campus became the next step to "the new normal". To absorb this change seamlessly, it was considered important to investigate personnel's beliefs about returning to campus and their perceptions of a safe working environment. An online survey was conducted among personnel (N = 1965) of Maastricht University, the Netherlands. University personnel's beliefs about a safe return to campus were assessed. The data were collected between 11 June and 28 June 2021. This study showed that, while most personnel (94.7%) were already vaccinated or willing to do so, not all personnel did feel safe to return to campus in September 2021. Over half of the respondents (58%) thought that the university is a safe place to return to work when the new academic year starts. However, the remainder of personnel felt unsafe or were uncertain for various reasons such as meeting in large groups or becoming infected. Moreover, when returning to campus, employees stated that they would require some time to reacclimate to their former work culture. The group who felt relatively more unsafe indicated that returning in September was too risky and that they worried about being infected. They wanted the safety guidelines to still be in force. On the other hand, the "safe" group stated safely returning to be "certainly possible" and trusted that others would still stick to the prevention guidelines. The findings led to practical recommendations for the University Board as they were preparing for organizing research and teaching for the upcoming academic year in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. A brief intervention was developed: a webinar in which the data were linked to the board's plans for safe returning. This study demonstrates that university boards may use research among personnel to develop adequate measures promoting safety and feelings of safety among personnel in similar future situations.

Facilitating Informed Decision Making: Determinants of University Students' COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake.

BACKGROUND: Although several COVID-19 vaccines are available, the current challenge is achieving high vaccine uptake. We aimed to explore university students' intention to get vaccinated and select the most relevant determinants/beliefs to facilitate informed decision making around COVID-19 vaccine uptake. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey with students (N = 434) from Maastricht University was conducted in March 2021. The most relevant determinants/beliefs of students' COVID-19 vaccine intention (i.e., determinants linked to vaccination intention, and with enough potential for change) were visualized using CIBER plots. RESULTS: Students' intention to get the COVID-19 vaccine was high (80%). Concerns about safety and side effects of the vaccine and trust in government, quality control, and the pharmaceutical industry were identified as the most relevant determinants of vaccine intention. Other determinants were risk perception, attitude, perceived norm, and self-efficacy beliefs. CONCLUSION: Our study identified several determinants of COVID-19 vaccine intention (e.g., safety, trust, risk perception, etc.) and helped to select the most relevant determinants/beliefs to target in an intervention to maximize COVID-19 vaccination uptake. Concerns and trust related to the COVID-19 vaccine are the most important targets for future interventions. Other determinants that were already positive (i.e., risk perception, attitudes, perceived norms, and self-efficacy) could be further confirmed.

Selection of determinants of students' adherence to COVID-19 guidelines and translation into a brief intervention.

BACKGROUND: When reopening universities in times of COVID-19, students still have to adhere to COVID-19 behavioral guidelines. We explored what behavioral determinants (and underlying beliefs) related to the adherence to guidelines are both relevant and changeable, as input for future interventions. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted (Oct-Nov 2020), identifying behavioral determinants (and underlying beliefs) of university students' adherence to COVID-19-guidelines, including keeping 1.5 m distance, getting tested, and isolating (N = 255). RESULTS: Attitude, perceived norm, self-efficacy, and several beliefs (e.g., risk perception beliefs 'I am not afraid because I am young' [r = -0.33; p < .001]; attitudinal beliefs, e.g., 'I feel responsible for telling people to adhere to guidelines' [r = 0.37; p < .001]; self-efficacy beliefs, e.g., 'COVID-19-prevention guidelines are difficult to adhere to' [r = -0.30; p < .001]) were associated with intention to adhere to guidelines, and for those beliefs there was room for improvement, making them suitable as possible intervention targets. CONCLUSIONS: Students mostly adhere to COVID-19 guidelines, but there is room for improvement. Interventions need to enhance students' adherence behavior by targeting the most relevant determinants as identified in this study. Based on these findings, a small intervention was introduced targeting the determinants of students' adherence to guidelines.