Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26384466›Full record

Trial reportJournal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics2016

Low-Fat Dietary Pattern Intervention and Health-Related Quality of Life: The Women's Health Initiative Randomized Controlled Dietary Modification Trial.

Annlouise R Assaf, Shirley A A Beresford, Patricia Markham Risica, Aaron Aragaki, Robert L Brunner, Deborah J Bowen, Michelle Naughton, Milagros C Rosal, Linda Snetselaar, Nanette Wenger

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Effects of total fat intake on body fatness in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  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

10 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

Annlouise R Assaf
Shirley A A Beresford
Patricia Markham Risica
Aaron Aragaki
Robert L Brunner
Deborah J Bowen
Michelle Naughton
Milagros C Rosal
Linda Snetselaar
Nanette Wenger
University of Washington · USEmory University · USFred Hutch Cancer Center · USJohn Brown University · USPfizer (United States) · USThe Ohio State University · USUniversity of Massachusetts Chan Medical School · USUniversity of Nevada, Reno · US

Funding

VANGUARD CENTER FOR WOMENS HEALTH INITIATIVEN01WH032100 · WH · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI BERESFORD, SHIRLEY AA · 1993 to 2001
$1.1M
WHI NIH HHS N01 WH032100WHI NIH HHS N01-WH-3-2100
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntensive dietary intervention programs may lead to benefits in vitality and other components of health quality. The Women's Health Initiative Dietary Modification (DM) intervention includes a large randomized controlled trial of an intensive intervention.

objectiveTo evaluate whether the intervention is associated with improved health-related quality of life (HRQoL) subscales, overall self-reported health, depression symptoms, cognitive functioning, and sleep quality.

designThis randomized controlled trial was analyzed as intent to treat.

participantsBetween 1993 and 1998, 48,835 women aged 50 to 79 years were recruited by 40 clinical centers across the United States. Eligibility included having fat intake at baseline ≥32% of total calories, and excluded women with any prior colorectal or breast cancer, recent other cancers, type 1 diabetes, or medical conditions with predicted survival <3 years.

interventionGoals were to reduce calories from fat to 20%, increase vegetables and fruit to 5+ servings, and increase grain servings to 6+ servings a day. During the first year, 18 group sessions were held, with quarterly sessions thereafter.

main outcome measuresThe RAND 36-Item Health Survey was used to assess HRQoL at baseline, Year 1, and close-out (about 8 years postrandomization), and estimate differential HRQoL subscale change scores. STATISTICAL ANALYSES PERFORMED: Mean change in HRQoL scores (Year 1 minus baseline) were compared by randomization group using linear models.

resultsAt 1 year, there was a differential change between intervention and comparison group of 1.7 units (95% CI 1.5, 2.0) in general health associated with the intervention. DM intervention improved physical functioning by 2.0 units (95% CI 1.7, 2.3), vitality by 1.9 units (95% CI 1.6, 2.2), and global quality of life by 0.09 units (95% CI 0.07, 0.12). With the exception of global quality of life, these effects were significantly modified by body mass index at baseline.

conclusionsDM intervention was associated with small, but significant improvements in three HRQoL subscales: general health, physical functioning, and vitality at 1 year follow-up, with the largest improvements seen in the women with the greatest baseline body mass index.

Indexed as

Diet, Fat-RestrictedHealth StatusNutrition PolicyPatient ComplianceQuality of LifeAgedBody Mass IndexCognition DisordersCognitive DysfunctionDepressionFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIntention to Treat AnalysisLethargyMiddle AgedBody mass indexDietary interventionHealth-related-quality of lifePostmenopausalRandomized controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID26384466
PMCPMC4733402
OpenAlexW1737008776

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.