Understanding Heterogeneity in Individual Responses to Digital Lifestyle Intervention Through Self-Monitoring Adherence Trajectories in Adults With Overweight or Obesity: Secondary Analysis of a 6-Month Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: Achieving clinically significant weight loss through lifestyle interventions for obesity management is challenging for most individuals. Improving intervention effectiveness involves early identification of intervention nonresponders and providing them with timely, tailored interventions. Early and frequent self-monitoring (SM) adherence predicts later weight loss success, making it a potential indicator for identifying nonresponders in the initial phase. Objective: This study aims to identify clinically meaningful participant subgroups based on longitudinal adherence to SM of diet, activity, and weight over 6 months as well as psychological predictors of participant subgroups from a self-determination theory (SDT) perspective. Methods: This was a secondary data analysis of a 6-month digital lifestyle intervention for adults with overweight or obesity. The participants were instructed to perform daily SM on 3 targets: diet, activity, and weight. Data from 50 participants (mean age: 53.0, SD 12.6 y) were analyzed. Group-based multitrajectory modeling was performed to identify subgroups with distinct trajectories of SM adherence across the 3 SM targets. Differences between subgroups were examined for changes in clinical outcomes (ie, body weight, hemoglobin A(1c)) and SDT constructs (ie, eating-related autonomous motivation and perceived competence for diet) over 6 months using linear mixed models. Results: Two distinct SM trajectory subgroups emerged: the Lower SM group (21/50, 42%), characterized by all-around low and rapidly declining SM, and the Higher SM group (29/50, 58%), characterized by moderate and declining diet and weight SM with high activity SM. Since week 2, participants in the Lower SM group exhibited significantly lower levels of diet (P=.003), activity (P=.002), and weight SM (P=.02) compared with the Higher SM group. In terms of clinical outcomes, the Higher SM group achieved a significant reduction in body weight (estimate: -6.06, SD 0.87 kg; P<.001) and hemoglobin A(1c) (estimate: -0.38, SD 0.11%; P=.02), whereas the Lower SM group exhibited no improvements. For SDT constructs, both groups maintained high levels of autonomous motivation for over 6 months. However, the Lower SM group experienced a significant decline in perceived competence (P=.005) compared with the Higher SM group, which maintained a high level of perceived competence throughout the intervention (P=.09). Conclusions: The presence of the Lower SM group highlights the value of using longitudinal SM adherence trajectories as an intervention response indicator. Future adaptive trials should identify nonresponders within the initial 2 weeks based on their SM adherence and integrate intervention strategies to enhance perceived competence in diet to benefit nonresponders.