Background Gamification refers to the use of game elements in nongame contexts. The use of gamification to change behaviors and promote physical activity (PA) is a promising avenue for tackling the global physical inactivity pandemic and the current prevalence of chronic diseases. However, there is no evidence of the effectiveness of gamified interventions with the existence of mixed results in the literature. Objective The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the effectiveness of gamified interventions and their health care potential by testing the generalizability and sustainability of their influence on PA and sedentary behavior. Methods A total of 5 electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) were searched for randomized controlled trials published in English from 2010 to 2020. Eligibility criteria were based on the components of the participants, interventions, comparators, and outcomes framework. Studies were included when they used gamified interventions in daily life with an active or inactive control group and when they assessed a PA or sedentary behavior outcome. We conducted meta-analyses using a random-effects model approach. Sensitivity analyses, influence analyses, and publication bias analyses were performed to examine the robustness of our results. Results The main meta-analysis performed on 16 studies and 2407 participants revealed a small to medium summary effect of gamified interventions on PA behavior (Hedges g=0.42, 95% CI 0.14-0.69). No statistical difference among different subgroups (adults vs adolescents and healthy participants vs adults with chronic diseases) and no interaction effects with moderators such as age, gender, or BMI were found, suggesting good generalizability of gamified interventions to different user populations. The effect was statistically significant when gamified interventions were compared with inactive control groups, such as waiting lists (Hedges g=0.58, 95% CI 0.08-1.07), and active control groups that included a nongamified PA intervention (Hedges g=0.23, 95% CI 0.05-0.41). This suggests that gamified interventions are not only efficient in changing behavior but also more effective compared with other behavioral interventions. The long-term effect (measured with follow-up averaging 14 weeks after the end of the intervention) was weaker, with a very small to small effect (Hedges g=0.15, 95% CI 0.07-0.23). Conclusions This meta-analysis confirms that gamified interventions are promising for promoting PA in various populations. Additional analyses revealed that this effect persists after the follow-up period, suggesting that it is not just a novelty effect caused by the playful nature of gamification, and that gamified products appear effective compared with equivalent nongamified PA interventions. Future rigorous trials are required to confirm these findings.

IntroductionPhysical inactivity and excessive sedentary behaviours are major preventable causes in both the development and the treatment of obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Nevertheless, current programmes struggle to engage and sustain physical activity (PA) of patients over long periods of time. To overcome these limitations, the Digital Intervention Promoting Physical Activity among Obese people randomised controlled trial (RCT) aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a group-based digital intervention grounded on gamification strategies, enhanced by social features and informed by the tenets of the self-determination theory and the social identity approach.Methods and analysisThis trial is a two-arm parallel RCT testing the effectiveness of the Kiplin digital intervention on obese and patients with T2DM in comparison to the usual supervised PA programme of the University Hospital of Clermont-Ferrand, France. A total of 50 patients will be randomised to one of the two interventions and will follow a 3-month programme with a 6-month follow-up postintervention. The primary outcome of the study is the daily step count change between the baseline assessment and the end of the intervention. Accelerometer data, self-reported PA, body composition and physical capacities will also be evaluated. To advance our understanding of complex interventions like gamified and group-based ones, we will explore several psychological mediators relative to motivation, enjoyment, in-group identification or perceived weight stigma. Finally, to assess a potential superior economic efficiency compared with the current treatment, we will conduct a cost–utility analysis between the two conditions. A mixed-model approach will be used to analyse the change in outcomes over time.Ethics and disseminationThe research protocol has been reviewed and approved by the Local Human Protection Committee (CPP Ile de France XI, No 21 004-65219). Results will inform the Kiplin app development, be published in scientific journals and disseminated in international conferences.Trial registration numberNCT04887077.

Understanding what predicts behavior change is a hot topic in health psychology, especially with regard to physical activity. While existing research has revealed key factors of physical activity (e.g., reasoned cognitions, automatic processes), it fails to accurately identify those that are specific to the most inactive populations (e.g., older adults, obese individuals, women, people living with chronic disease). In this commentary, we propose to articulate current approaches of health behavior change with the social psychology of stereotypes, based on the observation that inactive groups are often targeted by negative stereotypes. This articulation may allow to better identify the barriers to physical activity that are specific to individuals from the most inactive groups. More particularly, we propose that low self-control resources and self-perceptions may be key factors of physical inactivity in these individuals. This proposition could in turn help to explain why some behavioral change techniques that are efficient in healthy or young adults are inefficient in other individuals.