Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24269507›Full record

Trial reportAppetite2014

Does the type of weight loss diet affect who participates in a behavioral weight loss intervention? A comparison of participants for a plant-based diet versus a standard diet trial.

Gabrielle M Turner-McGrievy, Charis R Davidson, Sara Wilcox

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Appetite, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Gabrielle M Turner-McGrievyDepartment of Health Promotion, Education, and Behavior, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, 915 Greene Street, Room 529, Columbia, SC 29208, USA. Electronic address: brie@sc.edu.
Charis R DavidsonDepartment of Health Promotion, Education, and Behavior, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, 915 Greene Street, Room 529, Columbia, SC 29208, USA. Electronic address: davidsoc@email.sc.edu.
Sara WilcoxDepartment of Exercise Science, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Public Health Research Center, 921 Assembly St., Columbia, SC 29208, USA. Electronic address: wilcoxs@mailbox.sc.edu.

Funding

UNC Interdisciplinary Obesity Training (IDOT)(RMI)T32MH075854 · NIMH · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI POPKIN, BARRY M · 2005 to 2009
$1.2M
NIMH NIH HHS T32 MH075854
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Studies have found that people following plant-based eating styles, such as vegan or vegetarian diets, often have different demographic characteristics, eating styles, and physical activity (PA) levels than individuals following an omnivorous dietary pattern. There has been no research examining if there are differences in these characteristics among people who are willing to participate in a weight loss intervention using plant-based dietary approaches as compared to a standard reduced calorie approach, which does not exclude food groups. The present study compared baseline characteristics (demographics, dietary intake, eating behaviors (Eating Behavior Inventory), and PA (Paffenbarger Physical Activity Questionnaire)) of participants enrolling in two different 6-month behavioral weight loss studies: the mobile Pounds Off Digitally (mPOD) study, which used a standard reduced calorie dietary approach and the New Dietary Interventions to Enhance the Treatments for weight loss (New DIETs) study, which randomized participants to follow one of five different dietary approaches (vegan, vegetarian, pesco-vegetarian, semi-vegetarian, or omnivorous diets). There were no differences in baseline demographics with the exception of New DIETs participants being older (48.5±8.3years versus 42.9±11.2, P=0.001) and having a higher Body Mass Index (BMI, 35.2±5.3kg/m(2) versus 32.6±4.7kg/m(2), P=0.001) than mPOD participants. In age- and BMI-adjusted models, there were no differences in EBI scores or in any dietary variables, with the exception of vitamin C (85.6±5.9mg/d mPOD versus 63.4±7.4mg/d New DIETs, P=0.02). New DIETs participants reported higher levels of intentional PA/day (180.0±18.1kcal/d) than mPOD participants (108.8±14.4kcal/d, P=0.003), which may have been the result of New DIETs study recommendations to avoid increasing or decreasing PA during the study. The findings of this study demonstrate that using plant-based dietary approaches for weight loss intervention studies does not lead to a population which is significantly different from who enrolls in a standard, behavioral weight loss study using a reduced calorie dietary approach.

Indexed as

Diet, ReducingDiet, VegetarianEnergy IntakeFeeding BehaviorResearch DesignResearch SubjectsAdultAge FactorsBody Mass IndexDietExerciseFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedObesityVitaminsDietEating behaviorEating Behaviors InventoryEBImHealthmobile Pounds Off Digitally studymPODNew Dietary Interventions to Enhance the Treatments for Weight Loss studyNew DIETsPAphysical activityTBPtheory-based podcastVegetarianWeight loss

Identifiers

PMID24269507
PMCPMC3932532

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.