SynthesisEuropean journal of clinical nutrition2013
A systematic review of baseline psychosocial characterisation in dietary randomised controlled trials for weight loss.
Synthesis in European journal of clinical nutrition, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Factors associated with successful dietary changes in an energy-reduced Mediterranean diet intervention: a longitudinal analysis in the PREDIMED-Plus trial.European journal of nutrition · 2022Trial
- Baseline Depressive Symptoms, Completion of Study Assessments, and Behavior Change in a Long-Term Dietary Intervention Among Breast Cancer Survivors.Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2015Article
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
BACKGROUND/
objectiveTo investigate the extent of baseline psychosocial characterisation of subjects in published dietary randomised controlled trials (RCTs) for weight loss. SUBJECTS/
methodsSystematic review of adequately sized (n ≥ 10) RCTs comprising ≥ 1 diet-alone arm for weight loss were included for this systematic review. More specifically, trials included overweight (body mass index >25 kg/m(2)) adults, were of duration ≥ 8 weeks and had body weight as the primary outcome. Exclusion criteria included specific psychological intervention (for example, Cognitive Behaviour Therapy (CBT)), use of web-based tools, use of supplements, liquid diets, replacement meals and very-low calorie diets. Physical activity intervention was restricted to general exercise only (not supervised or prescribed, for example, VO2 maximum level).
resultsOf 176 weight-loss RCTs published during 2008-2010, 15 met selection criteria and were assessed for reported psychological characterisation of subjects. All studies reported standard characterisation of clinical and biochemical characteristics of subjects. Eleven studies reported no psychological attributes of subjects (three of these did exclude those taking psychoactive medication). Three studies collected data on particular aspects of psychology related to specific research objectives (figure scale rating, satiety and quality-of-life). Only one study provided a comprehensive background on psychological attributes of subjects.
conclusionBetter characterisation in behaviour-change interventions will reduce potential confounding and enhance generalisability of such studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23612509What 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.