ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03337204Updated Nov 17, 2017

The Engaged4Life Study: Enhancing the Health-Promoting Effects of Older Adults' Activity Portfolios

An interventional study of Technology-assisted self-monitoring and Workshop and Peer Mentoring in Sedentary Lifestyle, sponsored by Boston College. Completed. Open to participants aged 65 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2017-11-17.

Sponsored by Boston College · Not applicable, Interventional, and Prevention

From the registry’s dates

  • Registered 2 years 3 months after the study started (first participant enrolled Jul 2015, registered Nov 2017).
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
30
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
65 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This study designs and tests a multi-component intervention- Engaged4Life- designed to enhance physical activity (PA), cognitive activity (CA), social interaction (SI) and personal meaning (PM) in low-engaged community-dwelling older adults' everyday life activities through: 1) technology-assisted self-monitoring of PA, CA, SI, and PM activity engagement, 2) psycho-education + goal setting (via a 3-hour workshop), and 3) one-on-one peer mentoring (via phone 2X/week for 3 weeks) to support goal implementation. 15 adults age 65 or older will be randomized to receive all 3 intervention components and 15 to receive only the technology-assisted self-monitoring component.

Read the detailed description

The Social Model of Health Promotion posits that physical, cognitive, and social activity embedded within activities can help maintain or even restore cognitive and functional health in later life and stimulating activities that carry personal meaning or confer a sense of purpose may have stronger health-promoting effects than activities that are just stimulating. While the Experience Corps program-a community volunteering program for older adults designed to explicitly embed these characteristics-is an effective model for health-promotion, this program is not, as of yet, widely accessible. Further, formal volunteering is not always an activity that is attractive or accessible for older adults, and other interventions aimed at promoting social role involvement among older adults have shown only limited effectiveness in doing so. Thus, the current study explores whether it is possible to create an individually-tailored intervention that encourages older adults to 1) carefully examine their existing "activity portfolios" (technology-assisted self-monitoring), 2) empowers them with the knowledge and skills to make improvements upon their "activity portfolios" by enhancing/supplementing activities in ways that increase their overall levels of physical activity, cognitive activity, social interaction, and personal meaning (psycho-education + goal setting via a workshop), and 3) provides social support through peers in implementing their goals (one-on-one peer mentoring). Targeting a sample of community dwelling older adults who are at-risk for adverse cognitive and physical health outcomes due to their sedentary activity levels, we aim to influence positive changes in overall health and well-being in a way that is more practical, effective, and sustainable than prior interventions.

02

Conditions studied

  • Sedentary Lifestyle

Browse trials for

03

In context

Sedentary Behavior

1,273 studies on the registry are indexed under Sedentary Behavior; 300 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 30 is below the median of 60 across 1,076 interventional studies indexed under Sedentary Behavior.

Browse Sedentary Behavior studies →

Lead sponsor

Boston College is the lead sponsor of 38 studies on the registry; 7 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
65 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Age of 65 or older
  • Low-to-moderate engagement levels as determined by a score of \<10 on a modified version of the Health Enhancement Lifestyle Profile (HELP) (Hwang, 2010), where only the domains of exercise, social and productive activity, and leisure were included
  • A resident of Waltham, MA
  • Willing to be randomly assigned to study arm
  • Available for relevant study dates

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Age of 64 or younger
  • Living in an assisted living or nursing home facility
  • Significant cognitive impairment (those with >2 errors on the six-item screener by Callahan, Unverzagt, Hui, Perkins, \& Hendrie, 2002)
  • Reports that a doctor has told them that it is unsafe to participate in physical activity
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Prevention
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Participant)
Enrollment
30 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Engaged4Life

    Participants randomly assigned to this group receive: 1) technology-assisted self-monitoring of daily activity via a Fitbit Zip worn daily (for 8 weeks) and a daily tablet self-report survey (completed for a 7-day period at baseline and a second 7-day period 4-weeks later); and 2) a one-time, 3hr workshop and peer mentoring (via phone 2X/week for 3 weeks). The workshop includes psychoeducation on the relationship between active engagement and health and well-being and a goal setting activity focused on carefully assessing and then make improvements upon existing "activity portfolios". Peer mentors provide support as participants implement their goals.

    Behavioral: Technology-assisted self-monitoring · Behavioral: Workshop and Peer Mentoring

  • Active comparator
    Technology-assisted self-monitoring only

    Participants randomly assigned to this group receive: 1) technology-assisted self-monitoring of daily activity via a Fitbit Zip worn daily (for 8 weeks) and a daily tablet self-report survey (completed for a 7-day period at baseline and a second 7-day period 4-weeks later). While it is expected that wearing the Fitbit and raising consciousness of activity engagement may initially result in behavior change, it is not expected to have a sustained impact on outcomes over time.

    Behavioral: Technology-assisted self-monitoring

Interventions

  • BehavioralTechnology-assisted self-monitoring

    Participants receive a Fitbit Zip, an iPad Mini tablet device, training on how to use the Fitbit and iPad, and are asked to complete brief surveys each night on their activity engagement that day (for two 7-day periods).

  • BehavioralWorkshop and Peer Mentoring

    Participants receive a 3-hour Engaged4Life Workshop (psychoeducation + goal setting) and one-on-one peer mentoring via phone 2X/week for 3 weeks.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Physical Activity: Steps per day

    Measured using the Fitbit Zip pedometer

    Time frame: worn daily for 8 weeks

Secondary outcomes

  1. Cognitive activity (CA)(assessed daily)

    Cognitive activity (CA) assessed daily was measured as respondents' assessment of the number of cognitively stimulating activities they had participated in that day from a list of 13 activities plus one possible write-in "other" activity.

    Time frame: asked daily for 7 days at baseline and again for 7 days during week 4

  2. Social interaction (SI) (assessed daily)

    Social interaction (SI) questions focused on the quantity (the number of social interactions the respondent had that day, including in-person, by telephone, or by video, but NOT including email, text, or social media) and the quality (whether the participant had a problematic social interaction that day and the perceived stress of the problematic social interaction; and whether the participant had a positive social interaction that day and the perceived positivity of that social interaction) of daily social interactions.

    Time frame: asked daily for 7 days at baseline and again for 7 days during week 4

  3. Personal meaning (PM) (assessed daily)

    Respondents were asked 4 questions around whether they did anything that day that 1) benefited others, 2) left them feeling personally satisfied or accomplished, 3) felt significant in the broader scheme of things, or 4) was personally meaningful. Response options included 0 (not at all), 1 (to some extent), and 3 (to a great extent). Respondents were also asked a more global question: How much did you feel your life had purpose today? Th response scale ranged from 1 to 7 .

    Time frame: asked daily for 7 days at baseline and again for 7 days during week 4

07

Study locations

No study locations are listed for this record.

08

References and documents

Publications

  • Callahan CM, Unverzagt FW, Hui SL, Perkins AJ, Hendrie HC. Six-item screener to identify cognitive impairment among potential subjects for clinical research. Med Care. 2002 Sep;40(9):771-81. doi: 10.1097/00005650-200209000-00007. PubMed 12218768 ↗
  • Hwang JE. Promoting healthy lifestyles with aging: development and validation of the Health Enhancement Lifestyle Profile (HELP) using the Rasch measurement model. Am J Occup Ther. 2010 Sep-Oct;64(5):786-95. doi: 10.5014/ajot.2010.09088. PubMed 21073109 ↗
  • Heaven B, Brown LJ, White M, Errington L, Mathers JC, Moffatt S. Supporting well-being in retirement through meaningful social roles: systematic review of intervention studies. Milbank Q. 2013 Jun;91(2):222-87. doi: 10.1111/milq.12013. PubMed 23758511 ↗
  • Fried LP, Carlson MC, Freedman M, Frick KD, Glass TA, Hill J, McGill S, Rebok GW, Seeman T, Tielsch J, Wasik BA, Zeger S. A social model for health promotion for an aging population: initial evidence on the Experience Corps model. J Urban Health. 2004 Mar;81(1):64-78. doi: 10.1093/jurban/jth094. PubMed 15047786 ↗
  • Fried LP, Carlson MC, McGill S, Seeman T, Xue QL, Frick K, Tan E, Tanner EK, Barron J, Frangakis C, Piferi R, Martinez I, Gruenewald T, Martin BK, Berry-Vaughn L, Stewart J, Dickersin K, Willging PR, Rebok GW. Experience Corps: a dual trial to promote the health of older adults and children's academic success. Contemp Clin Trials. 2013 Sep;36(1):1-13. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2013.05.003. Epub 2013 May 13. PubMed 23680986 ↗
  • Jenkinson CE, Dickens AP, Jones K, Thompson-Coon J, Taylor RS, Rogers M, Bambra CL, Lang I, Richards SH. Is volunteering a public health intervention? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the health and survival of volunteers. BMC Public Health. 2013 Aug 23;13:773. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-773. PubMed 23968220 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Undecided

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Ran from Jul 2015 to primary completion in Nov 2015, 3 months.

Of 733 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Sedentary Behavior, half reached primary completion within 14 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 6 and three quarters within 31. This study's 3 months is below that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 741 studies reached it within 14 months; a quarter within 6 and three quarters within 31.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Nov 6, 2017
First posted
Nov 8, 2017
StartActual
Jul 31, 2015
Primary completionActual
Nov 3, 2015
CompletionActual
Dec 22, 2015
Last update
Nov 17, 2017
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Nov 17, 2017, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03337204
Lead sponsor
Boston College
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Nov 8, 2017
Start date
Jul 31, 2015
Primary completion
Nov 3, 2015
Completion
Dec 22, 2015
Last update
Nov 17, 2017

Study contacts

Christina J Costa, PhD
principal investigator · Boston College

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Nov 2017. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion