Do financial #incentives enhance online behavioral weight management? The iREACH3 results are out! Participants in the Internet+incentives group lost more weight (−6.4 kg) than those in the Internet-only group (−4.7 kg; p<0.01). https://www.ajpmonline.org/article/S0749-3797(20)30158-6/pdf

Both outcomes and behaviors were incentivized. Behaviors were incentivized weekly for the first 8 weeks-- up to $15/week if they reported diet self-monitoring and self-weighing on all 7 days of the week or $10/week if they indicated some combination of these behaviors >10 times.

At 2 months, those who lost ≥5% received $35
and those who lost ≥3% received $25; at 6 months, those who lost ≥10% earned $75 and those who lost ≥5% received $50. The maximum incentive for behaviors and outcomes during the 6-month period was $230.

The groups diverged by 2 months of treatment: Participants in the Internet+incentives group lost significantly more weight at 2 months than those in the
Internet-only group.

Treatment engagement was higher in the Internet + incentives condition, with greater self-monitoring of behaviors targeted by incentives, AND higher rates
of behaviors NOT targeted and higher self-reported physical activity.

Participants received a payout in 7.2 of 8 weeks for BEHAVIORS, with payouts averaging $99 for weekly incentives. Incentivized weight loss OUTCOMES were reached by 64% at 2 months and 55% at 6 months. Total incentive costs averaged $153 per participant (out of a possible $230).

Remaining questions:
-Are outcome or behavioral incentives more important?
-If both are important, what is the optimal magnitude of outcome incentives and behavior incentives?
-What is the optimal timing of incentives?

Stay tuned for the 18 month outcomes! PIs: Jean Harvey & Delia West, @ChelseaaaLarsen @MonroeMovement and many others not on Twitter