Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25678325›Full record

Trial reportObesity (Silver Spring, Md.)2015

Effectiveness of a worksite-based weight loss randomized controlled trial: the worksite study.

Fabio A Almeida, Wen You, Samantha M Harden, Kacie C A Blackman, Brenda M Davy, Russell E Glasgow, Jennie L Hill, Laura A Linnan, Sarah S Wall, Jackie Yenerall and 2 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03690557 (Examining Reach and Implementation of an Evidence-based Weight Loss Program in Rural Primary Care), which is not on this map. Cited by 33 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 9 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.

NCT03690557 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

Examining Reach and Implementation of an Evidence-based Weight Loss Program in Rural Primary Care

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of NebraskaRan2018 to 2020Enrolled98ConditionsObesityArmsIncentaHealth
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Weight Reduction Interventions Using Digital Health for Employees with Obesity: A Systematic Review.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2022
    Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

12 authors.

Fabio A AlmeidaDepartment of Human Nutrition, Foods & Exercise, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA; Fralin Translational Obesity Research Center, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA.
Wen You
Samantha M Harden
Kacie C A Blackman
Brenda M Davy
Russell E Glasgow
Jennie L Hill
Laura A Linnan
Sarah S Wall
Jackie Yenerall
Jamie M Zoellner
Paul A Estabrooks

Funding

Tailored Worksite Weight Control ProgramsR01DK071664 · NIDDK · VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INST AND ST UNIV · PI ESTABROOKS, PAUL · 2007 to 2011
$3.1M
NIDDK NIH HHS 5R01DK071664-04NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK071664
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine the effectiveness of an individually targeted Internet-based intervention with monetary incentives (INCENT) at reducing weight of overweight and obese employees when compared with a less-intensive intervention (Livin' My Weigh [LMW]) 6 months after program initiation.

methodsTwenty-eight worksites were randomly assigned to either INCENT or LMW conditions. Both programs used evidence-based strategies to support weight loss. INCENT was delivered via daily e-mails over 12 months while LMW was delivered quarterly via both newsletters and on-site educational sessions. Generalized linear mixed models were conducted for weight change from baseline to 6 months post-program and using an intention-to-treat analysis to include all participants with baseline weight measurements.

resultsAcross 28 worksites, 1,790 employees (M = 47 years of age; 79% Caucasian; 74% women) participated. Participants lost an average of 2.27 lbs (P < 0.001) with a BMI decrease of 0.36 kg/m(2) (P < 0.001) and 1.30 lbs (P < 0.01) with a BMI decrease of 0.20 kg/m(2) (P < 0.01) in INCENT and LMW, respectively. The differences between INCENT and LMW in weight loss and BMI reduction were not statistically significant.

conclusionsThis study suggests that INCENT and a minimal intervention alternative may be effective approaches to help decrease the overall obesity burden within worksites.

Indexed as

Weight LossWorkplaceAdultElectronic MailFemaleHumansInternetMiddle AgedMotivationOverweightPatient ComplianceTreatment OutcomeWeight Reduction Programsbehavioral interventione-mailincentivesobesityworksite

Identifiers

PMID25678325
PMCPMC4380658

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

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.