NCT07318233

Brief Summary

The primary objective of this study is to evaluate whether adaptive, AI-delivered personalized self-efficacy-based AI coaching based on real-time physiological and performance feedback enhance indoor cycling power output during a 20-minute time trial compared to static affirmations and exercise-only control conditions.

Trial Health

63
Monitor

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
120

participants targeted

Target at P50-P75 for not_applicable

Timeline
31mo left

Started Jun 2026

Typical duration for not_applicable

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
not yet recruiting

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

December 19, 2025

Completed
17 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

January 5, 2026

Completed
5 months until next milestone

Study Start

First participant enrolled

June 1, 2026

Expected
2.6 years until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

December 23, 2028

5 days until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

December 28, 2028

Last Updated

March 3, 2026

Status Verified

February 1, 2026

Enrollment Period

2.6 years

First QC Date

December 19, 2025

Last Update Submit

February 27, 2026

Conditions

Keywords

Physical ActivityAI affirmationsjust-in-time adaptive interventioncycling

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • Mean cycling power output during 20-minute time trial

    Average cycling power output over the full 20-minute time trial. The outcome compares mean power between intervention arms (adaptive AI coaching vs. static affirmations vs. exercise-only control). Power is captured continuously via the cycling ergometer and summarized as the mean watts for each participant's trial.

    Day 2

Study Arms (3)

Control Group

NO INTERVENTION

No affirmations delivered. Participants receive only time notifications at 5, 10, 15, and 19 minutes for pacing awareness. Same equipment worn to control for potential monitoring effects.

Group 1: Self-efficacy-based AI coaching

EXPERIMENTAL

The Thompson Sampling contextual bandit algorithm, trained on Session 1 data, monitors performance continuously and evaluates every 5 seconds whether to deliver an affirmation.

Behavioral: Group 1: Self-efficacy-based AI coaching

Group 2: Static AI Affirmations

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

Generic motivational messages delivered at fixed intervals (minutes 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, and 18) regardless of performance state. Messages follow the same complexity gradient based on elapsed time rather than individual response.

Behavioral: Group 2: Static AI Affirmations

Interventions

The Thompson Sampling contextual bandit algorithm, trained on Session 1 data, monitors performance continuously and evaluates every 5 seconds whether to deliver an affirmation. The policy is trained to maximize a multi-objective "efficacy-preserving performance" function that rewards: * Maintaining target power relative to rolling 30s/2min/5min baselines * Stabilizing short-horizon power variability (30s coefficient of variation) * Stabilizing heart-rate (HR) trajectory consistent with efficient pacing The decision process considers: * Current power relative to 30-second, 2-minute, and 5-minute rolling averages * Power output variability (coefficient of variation over past 30 seconds) * Heart rate trajectory and cardiac drift patterns * Cadence stability and changes from baseline * Time elapsed and expected fatigue progression based on power-duration curve Self-efficacy-based AI coaching adapts to physiological measures (power and heart rate).

Group 1: Self-efficacy-based AI coaching

Generic motivational messages delivered at fixed intervals (minutes 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, and 18) regardless of performance state. Messages follow the same complexity gradient based on elapsed time rather than individual response: * Minutes 3, 6: "You're building momentum with every pedal stroke-maintain this strong rhythm" * Minutes 9, 12: "Strong effort-push through this challenge" * Minutes 15, 18: "Final push-finish strong"

Group 2: Static AI Affirmations

Eligibility Criteria

Age18 Years - 40 Years
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersYes
Age GroupsAdult (18-64)

You may qualify if:

  • Age 18-40 years
  • Recreationally active
  • Familiar with stationary cycling
  • Able to complete 20 minutes of vigorous cycling

You may not qualify if:

  • Cardiovascular, metabolic, or respiratory conditions
  • Medications affecting heart rate response
  • Lower extremity injury within past 3 months
  • Competitive cyclists (\>10 hours cycling/week)
  • Pregnancy

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

University of Miami

Coral Gables, Florida, 33146, United States

Location

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Motor Activity

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Behavior

Study Officials

  • Anna Queiroz, Ph.D.

    University of Miami

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Central Study Contacts

Anna Queiroz, Ph.D.

CONTACT

Meshak Cole, B.S.

CONTACT

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
not applicable
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
SINGLE
Who Masked
PARTICIPANT
Purpose
BASIC SCIENCE
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
PI Title
Associate Professor

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

December 19, 2025

First Posted

January 5, 2026

Study Start (Estimated)

June 1, 2026

Primary Completion (Estimated)

December 23, 2028

Study Completion (Estimated)

December 28, 2028

Last Updated

March 3, 2026

Record last verified: 2026-02

Data Sharing

IPD Sharing
Will not share

Locations