Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26075751›Full record

Trial reportAnnals of internal medicine2015

Effect of Allowing Choice of Diet on Weight Loss: A Randomized Trial.

William S Yancy, Stephanie B Mayer, Cynthia J Coffman, Valerie A Smith, Ronette L Kolotkin, Paula J Geiselman, Megan A McVay, Eugene Z Oddone, Corrine I Voils

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

Trial report in Annals of internal medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01152359 (Considering Patient Diet Preference to Optimize Weight Loss), which is not on this map. Cited by 35 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 5 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.

NCT01152359 nacompletednot on this map

Considering Patient Diet Preference to Optimize Weight Loss

TypeinterventionalSponsorVA Office of Research and DevelopmentRan2011 to 2013Enrolled207ConditionsObesityArmsChoice, Control
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Effects of treatment, choice, and preference on health-related quality-of-life outcomes in patients with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2018
    Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Should carbohydrate-modified diets be the first option for weight loss in people with impaired glucose metabolism? A scoping review.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2024
    Article
  20. Design, analysis, and interpretation of treatment response heterogeneity in personalized nutrition and obesity treatment research.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2023 · on this map
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

William S Yancy
Stephanie B Mayer
Cynthia J Coffman
Valerie A Smith
Ronette L Kolotkin
Paula J Geiselman
Megan A McVay
Eugene Z Oddone
Corrine I Voils

Funding

Considering Patient Diet Preference to Optimize Weight LossI01HX000263 · VA · DURHAM VA MEDICAL CENTER · PI YANCY, WILLIAM S. · 2011 to 2013
–
HSRD VA I01 HX000263
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChoosing a diet rather than being prescribed one could improve weight loss.

objectiveTo examine whether offering choice of diet improves weight loss.

designDouble-randomized preference trial of choice between 2 diets (choice) versus random assignment to a diet (comparator) over 48 weeks. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01152359).

settingOutpatient clinic at a Veterans Affairs medical center. PATIENTS: Outpatients with a body mass index of at least 30 kg/m2.

interventionChoice participants received information about their food preferences and 2 diet options (low-carbohydrate diet [LCD] or low-fat diet [LFD]) before choosing and were allowed to switch diets at 12 weeks. Comparator participants were randomly assigned to 1 diet for 48 weeks. Both groups received group and telephone counseling for 48 weeks. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was weight at 48 weeks.

resultsOf 105 choice participants, 61 (58%) chose the LCD and 44 (42%) chose the LFD; 5 (3 on the LCD and 2 on the LFD) switched diets at 12 weeks, and 87 (83%) completed measurements at 48 weeks. Of 102 comparator participants, 53 (52%) were randomly assigned to the LCD and 49 (48%) were assigned to the LFD; 88 (86%) completed measurements. At 48 weeks, estimated mean weight loss was 5.7 kg (95% CI, 4.3 to 7.0 kg) in the choice group and 6.7 kg (CI, 5.4 to 8.0 kg) in the comparator group (mean difference, -1.1 kg [CI, -2.9 to 0.8 kg]; P = 0.26). Secondary outcomes of dietary adherence, physical activity, and weight-related quality of life were similar between groups at 48 weeks. LIMITATIONS: Only 2 diet options were provided. Results from this sample of older veterans might not be generalizable to other populations.

conclusionContrary to expectations, the opportunity to choose a diet did not improve weight loss.

Indexed as

Choice BehaviorWeight LossCaloric RestrictionDiet, Carbohydrate-RestrictedDiet, Fat-RestrictedDiet, ReducingDouble-Blind MethodExerciseFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMaleMiddle AgedObesityPatient CompliancePatient Preference

Identifiers

PMID26075751
PMCPMC4470323

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.