Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25494712›Full record

SynthesisObesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity2015

Effectiveness of weight loss interventions--is there a difference between men and women: a systematic review.

R L Williams, L G Wood, C E Collins, R Callister

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 131 papers, 14 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
131citing papers in PubMed, 14 pooled it
10.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

131 citing papers in PubMed, 14 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 225 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. 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 · 2022
    Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. The impact of adult behavioural weight management interventions on mental health: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2021
    Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Methodological quality of behavioural weight loss studies: a systematic review.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2016
    Pooled it
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

71 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

R L WilliamsSchool of Biomedical Sciences and Pharmacy, Faculty of Health and Medicine, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.
L G Wood
C E Collins
R Callister
University of Newcastle Australia · AUHunter Medical Research Institute · AURMIT University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Effective strategies are required to reduce the prevalence of overweight and obesity; however, the effectiveness of current weight loss programmes is variable. One contributing factor may be the difference in weight loss success between men and women. A systematic review was conducted to determine whether the effectiveness of weight loss interventions differs between men and women. Randomized controlled trials published up until March 2014 were included. Effect sizes (Hedges' g) were used to examine the difference in weight outcomes between men and women. A total of 58 studies met the eligibility criteria with 49 studies of higher quality included in the final data synthesis. Eleven studies that directly compared weight loss in men and women reported a significant sex difference. Ten of these reported that men lost more weight than women; however, women also lost a significant amount of weight. Analysis of effect sizes found small differences in weight loss favouring men for both diet (g = 0.489) and diet plus exercise (g = 0.240) interventions. There is little evidence from this review to indicate that men and women should adopt different weight loss strategies. Current evidence supports moderate energy restriction in combination with exercise for weight loss in both men and women.

Indexed as

Diet, ReducingExerciseHealth BehaviorWeight LossFemaleHumansMaleObesitySex FactorsTreatment OutcomeSex differencessystematic reviewweight loss

Identifiers

PMID25494712
PMCPMC4359685
OpenAlexW2096792375

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.