CONSORT-EHEALTH Checklist V1.6.2 Report

1b-i) Key features/functionalities/components of the intervention and comparator in the METHODS section of the ABSTRACT Intervention group participants (n=137) received (1) a booklet with information on how to increase their steps, (2) a non-blinded pedometer and (3) an Internet link to request computer-tailored step advice. Control group participants (n=137) did not receive any of the above mentioned intervention components. 1b-ii) Level of human involvement in the METHODS section of the ABSTRACT an Internet link to request computer-tailored step advice' 1b-iii) Open vs. closed, web-based (self-assessment) vs. face-to-face assessments in the METHODS section of the ABSTRACT Participants (≥18 years) were recruited between May 2012 and December 2012 from eight Flemish workplaces. ' 'Self-reported (IPAQ) and pedometer-based PA were assessed' 1b-iv) RESULTS section in abstract must contain use data The recruitment process resulted in 274 respondents (response rate of 15.1%) who agreed to participate.' 1b-v) CONCLUSIONS/DISCUSSION in abstract for negative trials Primary outcome: A computer-tailored, pedometer-based PA intervention was effective in increasing both pedometer-based, and self-reported PA levels. Negative: However, more efforts should be devoted to recruit and retain participants in order to improve the public health impact of the intervention. INTRODUCTION 2a-i) Problem and the type of system/solution Page 4: 'existing computer-tailored interventions also have limitations. Completing questionnaires is time-consuming and, self-reported PA data may have been influenced by response and recall biases [17]. Therefore, we developed a web-based computer-tailored PA advice, based on participants’ objectively measured daily step counts [18]. Consequently, the assessment of baseline PA will be more accurate and participants will no longer need to complete an extensive questionnaire to assess their baseline PA level.' 2a-ii) Scientific background, rationale: What is known about the (type of) system Page 4-5: Feasibility of this web-based computer-tailored step advice was examined by De Cocker et al. (2012) in a pilot study. In this pilot study, a randomized controlled trial was conducted among participants recruited through general practitioners (GPs) [18]. This demonstrated that the majority of the participants accepted the step advice well, and that is was perceived as useful. While PA increased, no superior intervention effects on PA levels were found in the tailored condition, compared with the standard condition. This could be explained by three factors. Firstly, the statistical power was limited, since the study sample at posttest was rather small (n=69). Only 20 participants provided objective pedometer data on both baseline and post intervention measurements. Secondly, participants of the control condition also received a pedometer and step information during the study period; however pedometers as stand-alone intervention have shown to be effective in increasing step counts in adults as well [19]. Thirdly, the pilot study only assessed pedometer-based and self-reported PA at two time points (baseline and three-months post baseline), whereby it is not possible to examine the effect of the intervention immediately after requesting the advice. To overcome these shortcomings,... ' METHODS 3a) CONSORT: Description of trial design (such as parallel, factorial) including allocation ratio Page 5: To overcome these shortcomings, a new cluster-randomized controlled trial was conducted to assess the effectiveness of the online-tailored step advice in adults with 1) a larger sample, 2) a control group that did not receive any intervention component and 3) three assessment points. 3b) CONSORT: Important changes to methods after trial commencement (such as eligibility criteria), with reasons Not relevant, methods were not changed. 3b-i) Bug fixes, Downtimes, Content Changes Not relevant, no important changes were made. 4a) CONSORT: Eligibility criteria for participants Page 5: 'Only Dutch speaking employees between 18 and 65 years old, who had access to the Internet at work or at home, were eligible.' 4a-i) Computer / Internet literacy Page 5: 'Only Dutch speaking employees between 18 and 65 years old, who had access to the Internet at work or at home, were eligible. Interested employees could sign up by returning a confirmation e-mail to the researchers.' 4a-ii) Open vs. closed, web-based vs. face-to-face assessments: Page 5: 'An invitation e-mail with study information was sent to managers of 18 white-collar workplaces in three waves at different times of the year to overcome seasonal effects. The first wave started in May 2012, the second wave in September 2012 and the third wave in December 2012. Eight workplaces, of which three schools, three commercial organizations, and two non-profit organizations, consented to participate. All employees of a single workplace were allocated at random to either the intervention or a waiting list control group, in order to avoid contamination between employees receiving the intervention and those who were not receiving the intervention. Every wave contained at least one intervention and one control workplace. Subsequently, employees of the participating workplaces were recruited by e-mail. ' 4a-iii) Information giving during recruitment