Online Communities for Promoting Physical Activity:
A Scoping Review of Use, Characteristics and Research Gaps
Jennifer Hachiya
a
Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, The Open University, Milton Keynes, U.K.
Keywords: Digital Platforms, Physical Activity, Health Communities, Health Promotion, User Engagement.
Abstract: The objective of this scoping review was to identify, characterise, and synthesise existing literature on the use
of online communities (OC) to promote physical activity (PA) and identify gaps to direct future research.
Systematic searches were conducted in Science Direct, PubMed, Scopus, and Institute of Electrical and Elec-
tronics Engineers Xplore for studies published up to August 2020. The search terms included a combination
of the following keywords: physical activity, sedentary, exercise, health, sport, brand, and online community.
No limits were used. Studies were included if they encompassed a full publication containing enough details
on characteristics and described any feature primarily aiming at PA promotion. A total of 21 different OC
were found in the total of 25 selected studies. Of those studies, all reported on at least one behaviour change
technique, 68.2% (n=15) used websites to support the OC, 36% (n=9) reported on strategies to keep users
engaged, 16% (n=4) comprised information related to the design process, and 16% (n=4) reported on OC
effectiveness. Existing reports do not provide evident detailed information on the design process or user en-
gagement strategies related to OC, and only a few studies assess its effectiveness in improving PA. Further
research is needed.
1 INTRODUCTION
Global levels of physical activity (PA) have not been
improving, despite evidence pointing out that PA is the
cornerstone of a healthy lifestyle. Evidence has shown
PA to be associated with lower rates of all-cause
mortality (Zhao et al., 2020), chronic diseases such as
cardiovascular diseases and hypertension (Carnethon,
2009; Hegde & Solomon, 2017; Lanier et al., 2016;
O’Donovan et al., 2017), type-2 diabetes
(Hamasaki, 2016), cancer (Brown et al., 2014),
mental health problems (Biddle, 1992, 2016), and
better cognitive health and sleep (Swirski et al.,
2019).
OC refers to “a group of people with a common
purpose whose interaction is mediated and
supported by computer systems and governed by
formal and informal policies” (Preece, 2000).
Generally, it involves a dispersed group of people
who share interest and expertise in a specific topic
(Hagel & Armstrong, 1997) and who engage in
public discussions long enough, and with sufficient
human feeling (Rheingold, 1993), to create a sense
a
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1991-6580
of community (Blanchard & Lynne Markus, 2004).
This sense of community “exists in the minds of its
members and is constructed symbolically through
shared meanings, norms and culture” (Cohen, 1985;
Malinen, 2015).
The interest in OC to promote PA has been
receiving more attention in the past few years.
Research has explored OC users’ interaction and
sharing behaviours (Phan et al., 2014; Andrade et
al., 2018; Stragier et al., 2015; Zeng et al., 2018),
how sharing experiences in OC can motivate users
to increase PA (Boratto et al., 2017; Groenewegen
et al., 2012), possible barriers to PA (Malinen &
Nurkka, 2015; Sanders et al., 2019), and the
effectiveness of OC in promoting PA (Ba & Wang,
2013; Groenewegen et al., 2012; Richardson et al.,
2010). This growing body of diverse research raises
the need to conduct a scoping review with the aim
of synthesizing and comprehensively characterizing
existing evidence on how OC has been used to
promote PA and identifying potential gaps that
deserve further research.
Hachiya, J.
Online Communities for Promoting Physical Activity: A Scoping Review of Use, Characteristics and Research Gaps.
DOI: 10.5220/0013121400003911
Paper published under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)
In Proceedings of the 18th International Joint Conference on Biomedical Engineering Systems and Technologies (BIOSTEC 2025) - Volume 2: HEALTHINF, pages 425-432
ISBN: 978-989-758-731-3; ISSN: 2184-4305
Proceedings Copyright © 2025 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda.
425

2 MATERIALS AND METHODS
The scoping review methodology was considered the
appropriate approach as it aims to map key concepts
and summarise a range of evidence, especially in
complex fields, and identify gaps in the existing
literature (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005; Levac et al.,
2010). This review design is based on the
methodological framework proposed by Arksey and
O’Malley (2005) and Levac, Colquhoun and O’Brien
(2010), which is divided into five different stages: (1)
identifying the research question, (2) identifying
relevant studies, (3) study selection, (4) charting the
data and (5) collating, summarising, and reporting
results.
2.1 Research Questions
The research question guides the scoping review and,
particularly, informs on what authors believe the
review should target. This scoping review’s overall
research question is: “What is the existing evidence
on the use and characteristics of OC to promote PA?”.
This general question was operationalized in more
specific research questions:
(1) How has the design process of the platforms
that support OC been described?
(2) What type of digital platforms (DP) are used
to support OC?
(3) What are the existing OC features?
(4) What are the existing OC contents?
(5) What strategies are suggested to keep users
engaged in OC?
(6) Which behaviour change techniques are used
in OC?
(7) What is the effectiveness of OC in promoting
PA?
2.2 Identification of Relevant Studies
To find relevant studies, a comprehensive literature
search on five online databases was conducted:
Science Direct, PubMed, Scopus, and Institute of
Electrical and Electronics Engineers Xplore (IEEE)
using a combination of the following keywords:
(Physical Activity OR Sedentary OR Exercise OR
Health OR Sport) AND (Brand OR Online AND
Community) AND (Communication OR
Participation). The search covered the period between
the date of database inception and August 4th, 2020.
No limits on date, language, subject, or type were
used.
2.3 Study Selection
The search results from each database were exported
into Mendeley, merged and duplicates were removed.
Then, titles and abstracts were screened against
inclusion and exclusion criteria by one author. Full
texts of selected references were retrieved and
independently checked against inclusion criteria.
The operational definition for OC used for the
scoping review was, as referred to in the introduction,
“a group of people with a common purpose whose
interaction is mediated and supported by computer
systems and governed by formal and informal
policies” (Preece, 2004).
Studies were included if they encompassed a full
publication containing enough details on OC
characteristics and described any feature of an OC
aiming primarily at promoting PA. Studies were
excluded if PA was not the focus of the study, there
was an online intervention without reporting on an
OC, or if the study was a review or a study protocol.
In addition to author details and year, specific
information was extracted to answer each specific
question of this scoping review.
3 RESULTS
A total of 10,574 references were found, of which
5,923 were duplicates and were removed. Of the
4,651 remaining manuscripts, 4,548 were removed
after title and abstract screening, leaving 103
manuscripts for full-text screening. Of these, we were
unable to retrieve 4, and 25 manuscripts entered this
scoping review. The flowchart for this review can be
found in Figure 1 (Appendix A).
The 25 included manuscripts report on a total of
21 (84%) different OC, of which 2 (9.52%) were
categorized as Online SBC (Lopez-Gonzalez et al.,
2014; Malinen & Nurkka, 2015; Malinen & Ojala,
2011).
3.1 Platform Design Process
From the 25 included manuscripts, only 4 studies
(16%) comprised information related to the design
process of 4 different platforms that support the
respective OC (Boratto et al., 2017; Elloumi et al.,
2017; Kolt et al., 2020; Malinen & Ojala, 2011).
These studies are related to different subjects,
such as identifying the main issues associated with
the platform usability (Boratto et al., 2017; Kolt et al.,
2020; Malinen & Ojala, 2011), and introducing
requirement elicitation processes to motivate for
HEALTHINF 2025 - 18th International Conference on Health Informatics
426

practice of PA (Elloumi et al., 2017). The information
extracted from these four studies can be found in
Table 1 (Appendix A).
3.2 Types of DP Used to Support OC
Within the 25 selected manuscripts, there is a total of
21 (95.5%) OC in 22 (88%) different platforms. Of
the 22 different platforms, 10 (45.5%) were purposely
developed to accommodate the OC, and the
remaining 12 (55.5%) OC used pre-existing platforms
(i.e., commercial platforms). Fifteen (68.2%)
platforms of the 22 platforms supported on website
format (Elloumi et al., 2017; Feldvari et al., 2020;
Greene et al., 2013; Groenewegen et al., 2012; Kolt
et al., 2020; Lopez-Gonzalez et al., 2014; Mailey et
al., 2019; Malinen & Nurkka, 2015; Malinen & Ojala,
2011; Manzoor et al., 2016; Resnick et al., 2010;
Richardson et al., 2010; Toscos et al., 2010; Yu,
2018); 5 (22.7%) were supported on both website and
app formats (Andrade et al., 2018; Ba & Wang, 2013;
Boratto et al., 2017; Fan et al., 2019; Li & Yan, 2020;
Stragier et al., 2015, 2017; Tague et al., 2014; Zeng
et al., 2018); and 2 (9.10%) were supported only on
app format (Phan et al., 2014; Sanders et al., 2019).
Details can be found in Table 2 (Appendix A).
3.3 Existing OC Features
All the 25 included studies reported on OC features
and a total of 20 different features were reported
across them, and their reporting frequency is
presented in Figure 2. Details on the OC features’
presence in each study can be consulted in Table 3
(Appendix A).
Figure 2: OC Features in the included manuscripts.
The most reported OC features (with a reporting
frequency between 50 and 100%) were: gamification,
user records/ user goals, user log/ stats/ trends,
posting, PA programming, discussion boards/
forums, comments/ likes, connectivity/
synchronization, self-monitoring, and the possibility
to connect with other users. The least reported OC
Features (with a reporting frequency between 0 and
49%) were: memberships, broadcasts,
feedback/tailored messages, route
planning/localization, notifications, customizable
dashboard, join groups, direct messaging, PA
activities list and gratification.
3.4 Existing OC Contents
All the 25 included studies reported on the OC
contents and a total of 10 different categories were
defined based on the data collected from the included
manuscripts, which are described in Table 4 and their
frequency presented in Figure 3. Details about OC
contents’ presence in each study can be consulted in
Table 4 (Appendix A).
The most reported OC contents (with a reporting
frequency between 50 and 100%) were: skills
training, posting, contests/ challenges, support group
discussions. The least reported OC contents (with a
reporting frequency between 0 and 49%) were:
offline events, audio content, audio-visual content,
maps, interviews/ surveys/ writing prompts, articles/
other resources.
Figure 3: Frequency of reporting of OC Contents.
3.5 Strategies to Support Users
Engagement
A total of 9 (36%) out of the 25 manuscripts included
in this scoping review report on strategies to keep
users engaged (Andrade et al., 2018; Ba & Wang,
2013; Boratto et al., 2017; Kolt et al., 2020; Lopez-
Gonzalez et al., 2014; Mailey et al., 2019; Malinen &
Ojala, 2011; Resnick et al., 2010; Richardson et al.,
Online Communities for Promoting Physical Activity: A Scoping Review of Use, Characteristics and Research Gaps
427

2010). The user engagement strategies retrieved from
the analysis of the included manuscript can be found
in Table 5 (Appendix A).
3.6 Behaviour Change Techniques
We found reference to at least one BCT in the 25
included manuscripts, being referred to 20 (76.9%)
out of the 26 BCT listed in Abraham and Michie’s
framework (2008). Only two BCT were reported in
all the 25 manuscripts (plan social support or social
change and provide opportunities for social
comparison). An additional four BCT were reported
in at least 50% of the included manuscripts. The
remaining 14 BCT were reported in 40% or less of the
included manuscripts. The BCT and their respective
frequency of reporting can be found in Figure 4
(Appendix A).
3.7 Effectiveness of OC in Promoting
PA
From the 25 selected manuscripts, only 4 (16%)
reported on the effectiveness of OC in promoting PA
(Greene et al., 2013; Mailey et al., 2019; Manzoor et
al., 2016; Richardson et al., 2010), comparisons
reported in these four studies, varied in aim, study
design, and target group (i.e., study participants, OC
members).
One study (Richardson et al., 2010) measured the
impact on PA behaviour change of adding an OC to
Stepping Up to Health, an automated lifestyle change
intervention, using pedometers to detect possible
changes in average daily step count. Participants had a
body mass index of 25 or higher, type 2 diabetes or
coronary artery disease. By the end of the intervention,
average daily steps increased in both study arms.
Manzoor et al. (2016) assessed PA changes between
members and non-members of an OC by analysing a
dataset of participants in a PA intervention.
Participants were employees of a non-profit healthcare
system company and their family members.
Study results conclude that OC members have
higher PA levels at the start of the program and
compared to users who are not in the OC, the increase
in PA is also significantly higher. Mailey et al. (2019)
compared the effects of a standard educational
intervention and an interactive, theory-based
intervention (based on Self-Determination Theory
delivered through podcast content and weekly
challenges in military spouses). Study results
indicated no between-group differences in PA.
Greene et al. (2013) examined whether the
intervention group that used the iWell OSN had
greater increases in PA when compared to a group
that received traditional education. Study results
suggest that both groups increased PA with no overall
difference in PA between groups.
4 DISCUSSION
This scoping review aimed to characterise and
synthesise existing literature on the use of OC to
promote PA and identify gaps to direct future
research.
Results suggest that the number of manuscripts on
OC has been increasing over the last few years. Most
OC are supported in website-only format and close to
half of the OC platforms used in the studies were
purposely developed to accommodate the OC.
However, information related to their design
process is scarce and OC features and contents are not
comprehensively detailed. Furthermore, studies
exploring strategies to keep users engaged in OC and
studies assessing the effectiveness of PA promotion
using OC are also lacking.
4.1 OC Platform Support and Usability
The majority of OC reported in the studies are
supported in website format, and almost half of them
were purposely developed to accommodate the OC.
Considering that, nowadays, 56% of internet traffic
comes from smartphones (GlobalStats, 2021) and
88% of mobile time is spent on apps (Wurmser,
2020), OC might benefit from being harboured in
apps, and it might help explain users’ current high
attrition rates in OC and unlikeliness for long-term
use of OC related to PA (Manzoor et al., 2016).
However, the fact that websites allow for higher
compatibility, cost-effectiveness, and broader
accessibility (i.e., according to the W3C Accessibility
Standards Overview) might explain why OC continue
to be mostly harboured in a website format (Cao &
Loiacono, 2021; Henry, 2021). This is a very
important point to explore considering that user
retention has been reported as one of the biggest
concerns in OC maintenance, even in OC which
reports positive and promising results in behaviour
change (Manzoor et al., 2016; Resnick et al., 2010).
Despite the high number of new platforms, there
was a small number of studies related to their design
process (16%; 4). Furthermore, the studies provided
scarce details on aspects of usability assessment and
involvement of users, and the data presented was
scattered and insufficient to understand the design
process of the OC platforms and to allow for
HEALTHINF 2025 - 18th International Conference on Health Informatics
428

comparisons between the development process of
different OC platforms.
These results suggest that developers of platforms
might not be employing a user-centred approach,
which might also contribute to low user-retention
rates reported in some studies (Edney et al., 2017;
Kolt et al., 2020). It is important to develop the
platforms that support OC employing a user-centred
approach so that their functional requirements allow
the OC to function in a way that meets the users’
needs and preferences, which is essential for the
success of an OC (Preece, 2004).
4.2 OC Features, Contents, and
User Engagement Strategies
Regarding OC features, self-monitoring (84%),
connect with users (84%), comment/likes (76%), and
gamification (72%) are among the most reported
ones. This is important to acknowledge, especially
because these features are associated with user
participation consistency and relationship-building in
the OC (Ba & Wang, 2013; Greene et al., 2013;
Manzoor et al., 2016), which might contribute to
increased user retention. It has been reported that
emotional support has a stronger effect on health
behaviour changes than informational support (Li &
Yan, 2020). Two other highly reported features which
include displaying users’ records and goals (68%),
and PA log, stats, and trends (56%) are also relevant
as they can leverage user interaction and relationship
building between users in the OC (Li & Yan, 2020),
fostering social and emotional support. However,
these strategies might need to be personalized. For
example, gamification features such as leaderboards,
point attribution and levelling up might negatively
impact some users as they find the challenge
unattainable (Werbach & Hunter, 2012) it might be
more beneficial to invest in more gratification
features prioritizing OC participation over PA.
Among the least reported OC features were
several that give users a sense of autonomy (i.e.,
customizable dashboard, route planning/localization,
direct messaging, logging PA from activities list)
and/or feed onto the sense of relatedness (i.e.,
memberships, join groups, broadcasts, notifications,
feedback/tailored messages). Considering the
importance of users’ sense of autonomy and
relatedness needs to encourage user engagement
(Malinen & Ojala, 2011; Tague et al., 2014), the fact
that these OC features are narrowly present in studies
might also contribute to decreased retention rates.
Information about OC content is scarce among
study reports. Contests and challenges, and skills
training were the most reported features, with the first
being aligned with the number of studies that report
gamification features. However, support group
discussions, which are crucial for higher user
engagement in OC (Andrade et al., 2018; Kolt et al.,
2020; Mailey et al., 2019; Malinen & Ojala, 2011;
Resnick et al., 2010) were reported in only around half
of the included studies. Included in the pool of least
reported OC contents are in-person events, maps, and
interviews/surveys/writing prompts. Considering that
these contents create a greater amount of physical
interaction and/or level of immersion with the shared
community (Blazquez Cano et al., 2017; Oh et al.,
2018), it might be beneficial to incorporate them more
often in OC.
Overall, there is not much information regarding
platform development and OC dynamics, hence it is
difficult to understand how choices were made and if
they are adjusted to users’ needs and preferences.
Therefore, although these contents were likely not
present in the OC, it is also possible that these
contents exist in the OC of included studies but were
not detailed in the manuscript. User engagement
strategies are a crucial part of OC because they
contribute to building awareness and promoting the
growth of collaborative knowledge, thus facilitating
learning (Lopez-Gonzalez et al., 2014). Considering
that retention is a main problem in OC (Kolt et al.,
2020), it was surprising that only 9 (36%) of these
reported specific user engagement strategies
(Andrade et al., 2018; Ba & Wang, 2013; Boratto et
al., 2017; Kolt et al., 2020; Lopez-Gonzalez et al.,
2014; Mailey et al., 2019; Malinen & Ojala, 2011;
Resnick et al., 2010; Richardson et al., 2010).
OC might benefit from using user engagement
strategies more often to create a higher sense of
community which could potentially contribute to
solving an identified challenge of preserving long-
term user engagement (Kolt et al., 2020; Manzoor et
al., 2016). Keeping OC closed and accessible only to
OC users might help clarify if some users aren’t as
actively engaged in OC due to hesitance to be
potentially viewable by a public audience (Andrade
et al., 2018).
Moreover, paid memberships might affect users’
participation level in OC due to the level of personal
investment in the OC (Ba & Wang, 2013). Future
qualitative studies aiming at understanding what are
the features, contents and user engagement strategies
that are valued by users and more likely to positively
affect retention are needed. These are likely to differ
among target groups and personal aims, highlighting
the need to develop OC and supporting platforms in a
user-centred approach as previously referred.
Online Communities for Promoting Physical Activity: A Scoping Review of Use, Characteristics and Research Gaps
429

4.3 Behaviour Change Techniques and
Effectiveness of OC in Promoting
PA
Practicing more PA, generally, involves changing
previous behaviours and adopting new ones.
Facilitating this change requires appropriate BCT.
Included studies report on 20 of the 26 BCT described
by Abraham and Michie (2008).
Furthermore, 14 of these 20 BCT are reported in
40% or less of the included manuscripts, suggesting
that BCT are not receiving adequate attention when
building an OC and respective supporting platform.
This is likely to impact the effectiveness of OC in terms
of PA promotion. For example, OC might benefit from
time management and stress management strategies,
prompting specific goal setting, or providing useful
prompts or cues as the lack of resources associated with
these BCT have been reported as constituting barriers
for PA (Toscos et al., 2010), or facilitators of PA
(Mailey et al., 2019; Rose et al., 2018). In line with the
low attention given to BCT, there are also only a few
studies (n=4;16%) on the effectiveness of OC to
increase PA. The reduced number of studies and their
high heterogeneity in terms of procedures and
comparisons prevent any firm conclusions. However,
taken together, they suggest that OC are not superior to
other forms of promoting PA. Further high-quality
studies comparing OC to other more traditional
interventions are required and these should also
include a cost-effectiveness analysis as one of the
potentially attractive aspects of OC is their ability to
reach a high number of individuals at lower costs.
5 LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE
DIRECTIONS
The categorisation of contents, features and user
engagement strategies was based on the authors'
knowledge of the subject rather than on validated
models, which we were unable to find. We also
acknowledge that the included manuscripts might not
comprehensively describe OC and the respective
support platforms.
6 CONCLUSION
Existing reports do not provide evident detailed
information on the design process, or user
engagement strategies, nor comprehensive and
specific data on OC features and contents. Only a few
studies were found that assess the effectiveness of OC
in promoting PA. Further research is required.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work was supported by Fundação para a Ciência
e Tecnologia (FCT) under the PhD grant
SFRH/BD/144296/2019.
REFERENCES
Andrade, E. L., Evans, W. D., Barrett, N., Edberg, M. C.,
& Cleary, S. D. (2018). Strategies to increase Latino
immigrant youth engagement in health promotion using
social media: Mixed-methods study. JMIR Public
Health and Surveillance, 4(4), e71.
Arksey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: To-
wards a methodological framework. International Jour-
nal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32.
Ba, S., & Wang, L. (2013). Digital health communities: The
effect of their motivation mechanisms. Decision Sup-
port Systems, 55(4), 941–947.
Biddle, S. (2016). Physical activity and mental health: Evi-
dence is growing. World Psychiatry, 15(2), 175–176.
Blanchard, A. L., & Markus, M. L. (2004). The experienced
"sense" of a virtual community: Characteristics and
processes. Database for Advances in Information Sys-
tems, 35(1), 64–79.
Blazquez Cano, M., Perry, P., Ashman, R., & Waite, K.
(2017). The influence of image interactivity upon user
engagement when using mobile touch screens. Comput-
ers in Human Behavior, 77, 406–412.
Boratto, L., Carta, S., Fenu, G., Manca, M., Mulas, F., &
Pilloni, P. (2017). The role of social interaction on us-
ers' motivation to exercise: A persuasive web frame-
work to enhance the self-management of a healthy life-
style. Pervasive and Mobile Computing, 36, 98–114.
Brown, J. C., Winters-Stone, K., Lee, A., & Schmitz, K. H.
(2014). Cancer, physical activity, and exercise. Com-
prehensive Physiology, 2(4), 2775–2809.
Cao, S., & Loiacono, E. (2021). Perceptions of web accessi-
bility guidelines by student website and app develop-
ers. Behaviour and Information Technology, 0(0), 1–19.
Carnethon, M. R. (2009). Physical activity and cardiovas-
cular disease: How much is enough? American Journal
of Lifestyle Medicine, 3(1_suppl), 44S–49S.
Cohen, A. P. (1985). The symbolic construction of commu-
nity. Routledge.
Edney, S., Plotnikoff, R., Vandelanotte, C., Olds, T., de
Bourdeaudhuij, I., Ryan, J., & Maher, C. (2017). "Ac-
tive Team": A social and gamified app-based physical
activity intervention: Randomised controlled trial study
protocol. BMC Public Health, 17(1), 1–10.
Elloumi, L., Meijerink, M., van Beijnum, B.-J., & Hermens,
H. (2017). Requirements, design, and pilot study of a
physical activity activation system using virtual
HEALTHINF 2025 - 18th International Conference on Health Informatics
430

communities. In J. Brooke, M. Rosson, & T. Winograd
(Eds.), Communications in Computer and Information
Science (Vol. 690, pp. 405–425). Springer.
Feldvari, K., Dremel, A., & Stanarević Katavić, S. (2020).
Virtual fitness community: Online behavior on a Croa-
tian fitness forum. In Lecture Notes in Computer Sci-
ence (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial
Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) (Vol.
12194 LNCS, pp. 459–474). Springer.
GlobalStats, S. (2021). Desktop vs mobile vs tablet market
share worldwide. StatCounter. https://gs.statcounter.
com/platform-market-share/desktop-mobile-tablet
Greene, J., Sacks, R., Piniewski, B., Kil, D., & Hahn, J. S.
(2013). The impact of an online social network with
wireless monitoring devices on physical activity and
weight loss. Journal of Primary Care & Community
Health, 4(3), 189–194.
Groenewegen, M., Stoyanov, D., Deichmann, D., & van
Halteren, A. (2012). Connecting with active people
matters: The influence of an online community on phys-
ical activity behavior. In P. Cunningham & M. Cun-
ningham (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Sci-
ence (Vol. 7710, pp. 96–109). Springer.
Hagel, J., & Armstrong, A. G. (1997). Net gain: Expanding
markets through virtual communities. Harvard Busi-
ness School Press.
Hamasaki, H. (2016). Daily physical activity and type 2 di-
abetes: A review. World Journal of Diabetes, 7(12),
243–245.
Hegde, S. M., & Solomon, S. D. (2017). Influence of phys-
ical activity on hypertension and cardiac structure and
function. Current Hypertension Reports, 19(3), 77–87.
Henry, S. L. (2021). W3C Accessibility Standards Over-
view. W3C Accessibility Initiative - Education and
Outreach Working
Group. https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guide-
lines/
Kolt, G. S., Duncan, M. J., Vandelanotte, C., Rosenkranz,
R. R., Maeder, A. J., Savage, T. N., ... & Caperchione,
C. M. (2020). Successes and challenges of an IT-based
health behaviour change program to increase physical
activity. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics,
268, 31–43.
Lanier, J. B., Bury, D. C., & Richardson, S. W. (2016). Diet
and physical activity for cardiovascular disease preven-
tion. American Family Physician, 93(11), 919–930.
Levac, D., Colquhoun, H., & O'Brien, K. K. (2010). Scop-
ing studies: Advancing the methodology. Implementa-
tion Science, 5(1), 69–80.
Li, Y., & Yan, X. (2020). How could peers in online health
communities help improve health behavior? Interna-
tional Journal of Environmental Research and Public
Health, 17(9), 3295–3305.
Lopez-Gonzalez, H., Guerrero-Solé, F., & Larrea, O.
(2014). Community building in the digital age: Dynam-
ics of online sports discussion. Communication & So-
ciety, 27(3), 83–105.
Malinen, S. (2015). Understanding user participation in
online communities: A systematic literature review of
empirical studies. Computers in Human Behavior,
46, 228–248.
Malinen, S., & Nurkka, P. (2015). Cultural influence on
online community use: A cross-cultural study on online
exercise diary users of three nationalities. International
Journal of Web Based Communities, 11(2), 153–169.
Malinen, S., & Ojala, J. (2011). Applying the heuristic eval-
uation method in the evaluation of social aspects of an
exercise community. In DPPI '11 - Designing Pleasura-
ble Products and Interfaces, Proceedings (pp. 234–
246). ACM.
Manzoor, A., Mollee, J. S., Araújo, E. F. M., Halteren, A.
T., & Klein, M. C. A. (2016). Online sharing of physical
activity: Does it accelerate the impact of a health pro-
motion program? In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE In-
ternational Conferences on Big Data and Cloud Com-
puting (pp. 201–208). IEEE.
Mailey, E. L., Irwin, B. C., Joyce, J. M., & Hsu, W.-W.
(2019). Independent but not alone: A web-based inter-
vention to promote physical and mental health among
military spouses. Applied Psychology: Health and
Well-Being, 11(3), 562–583.
Phan, N., Dou, D., Xiao, X., Piniewski, B., & Kil, D.
(2014). Analysis of physical activity propagation in a
health social network.
Proceedings of the 23rd ACM In-
ternational Conference on Information and Knowledge
Management (CIKM '14), 1329–1338.
Preece, J. (2000). Online communities: Designing usabil-
ity, supporting sociability. John Wiley.
Preece, J. (2004). Online communities: Researching socia-
bility and usability in hard-to-reach populations. Be-
havior and Information Technology, 23(2), 146–152.
Rheingold, H. (1993). The virtual community: Homestead-
ing on the electronic frontier. HarperCollins.
Richardson, C. R., Buis, L. R., Janney, A. W., Goodrich, D.
E., Sen, A., Hess, M. L., ... & Piette, J. D. (2010). An
online community improves adherence in an internet-
mediated walking program. Journal of Medical Internet
Research, 12(4), e71.
Sanders, I., Short, C. E., Bogomolova, S., Stanford, T., Plot-
nikoff, R., Vandelanotte, C., ... & Maher, C. (2019).
Characteristics of adopters of an online social network-
ing physical activity mobile phone app: Cluster analy-
sis. JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 7(6), e12484.
Stragier, J., Evens, T., & Mechant, P. (2015). Broadcast
yourself: An exploratory study of sharing physical ac-
tivity on social networking sites. Media International
Australia, 155, 120–129.
Swirski, M., Shaikh, N., Chinner, A., Gaaikema, E., &
Coulthard, E. (2019). Measuring the relationship be-
tween sleep, physical activity and cognition. bioRxiv.
Toscos, T., Consolvo, S., & McDonald, D. W. (2010). "...Is
it normal to be this sore?": Using an online forum to
investigate barriers to physical activity. In Proceedings
of the 1st ACM International Health Informatics Sym-
posium (pp. 346–355). ACM.
Werbach, K., & Hunter, D. (2012). For the win: How game
thinking can revolutionize your business. Wharton Dig-
ital Press.
Online Communities for Promoting Physical Activity: A Scoping Review of Use, Characteristics and Research Gaps
431

Wurmser, Y. (2020). The majority of Americans’ mobile
time spent takes place in apps. eMar-
keter.https://www.emarketer.com/content/the-majority-
of-americans-mobile-time-spent-takes-place-in-apps
Zeng, N., Ayyub, M., Sun, H., Wen, X., Xiang, P., & Gao,
Z. (2018). Effects of physically active learning on phys-
ical activity, health, and learning outcomes: A system-
atic review. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,
37(3), 221–233.
Zhao, M., Veeranki, S. P., Magnussen, C. G., & Xi, B.
(2020). Recommended physical activity and all-cause
and cause-specific mortality in US adults: Prospective
cohort study. The BMJ, 370, m2031.
HEALTHINF 2025 - 18th International Conference on Health Informatics
432