Trial reportEuropean journal of nutrition2014
Effectiveness of a tailor-made weight loss intervention in primary care.
Trial report in European journal of nutrition, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Medical Nutrition Therapy Interventions Provided by Dietitians for Adult Overweight and Obesity Management: An Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Evidence-Based Practice Guideline.Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics · 2023Guideline
- A systematic review of inequalities in the uptake of, adherence to, and effectiveness of behavioral weight management interventions in adults.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2022Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Effects of weight loss interventions for adults who are obese on mortality, cardiovascular disease, and cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2017Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Weight Management Interventions Provided by a Dietitian for Adults with Overweight or Obesity: An Evidence Analysis Center Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics · 2023Article
- Team-based "Get-a-Grip" lifestyle management programme in the treatment of obesity.Preventive medicine reports · 2020Article
- Mobilization with movement and kinesio taping in knee arthritis-evaluation and outcomes.International orthopaedics · 2018Article
- Evaluating the impact of a home-based rehabilitation service on older people and their caregivers: a matched-control quasi-experimental study.Clinical interventions in aging · 2018Article
- Weight-loss and exercise for communities with arthritis in North Carolina (we-can): design and rationale of a pragmatic, assessor-blinded, randomized controlled trial.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWeight loss interventions have been studied extensively, but methodological limitations negatively affecting applicability in everyday clinical practice are a very common problem in these studies. Despite the fact that obesity is treated mostly in a primary care setting, studies that investigate weight loss interventions in a primary care setting are scarce. Our objective was to assess the effectiveness of a tailor-made weight loss intervention in achieving a clinically significant weight loss in overweight (BMI ≥ 27 kg/m²) women aged 50-60 years in a primary care setting.
methodsAs part of a randomized controlled trial on the effects of a tailor-made weight loss intervention and oral glucosamine sulphate on the incidence of osteoarthritis of the knee in 407 overweight women aged 50-60 years, we analysed the effectiveness of the weight loss intervention in achieving clinically relevant weight loss.
resultsAt baseline, the mean body weight for all participants was 88.7 ± 13.2 kg, and the mean BMI was 32.4 ± 4.3 kg/m². The percentage of participants that lost ≥5 kg or 5 % of their baseline body weight was 14.8 versus 6.3 % (p = 0.012) at 6 months for the intervention group and the control group, respectively. At 12 months, this was 18.7 versus 14.9 % (p = 0.027). Mean weight gain at 6 months was -0.9 versus 0.9 kg (p < 0.001) for the intervention group and the control group, respectively. At 12 months, this was -0.6 versus 0.6 kg (p = 0.01). At 30 months of follow-up, no significant differences were found between both groups.
conclusionsThis weight loss intervention, which, at short notice, is easily applicable in everyday clinical practice, is effective in achieving clinically significant weight loss in overweight women aged 50-60 over a 12-month period. Long-term weight loss maintenance, however, occurred only marginally. Magnitude of the effect is comparable to that achieved in many other more intensive weight loss interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23429925What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.