Trial reportEuropean journal of nutrition2017
The effect of three different ad libitum diets for weight loss maintenance: a randomized 18-month trial.
Trial report in European journal of nutrition, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dietary Strategies for Weight Loss Maintenance.Nutrients · 2019Pooled it
- Determinants of weight loss maintenance: a systematic review.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2019Pooled it
- Adherence to Behavioral Weight Management: A Scoping Review of Definitions, Measurement, and Components.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2026Article
- Healthier lifestyles can modify the air pollutants effect on cardiovascular disease among the middle-aged and elderly.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Obesity and malnutrition in children and adults: A clinical review.Obesity pillars · 2023Review
- The energy balance model of obesity: beyond calories in, calories out.The American journal of clinical nutrition · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo test the effect of three diets in their ability to sustain weight loss and improve type 2 diabetes (T2D) and cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk markers after 18-month intervention.
methodsFollowing a ≥8 % weight loss, 131 healthy, overweight/obese (BMI ± SD 31.5 ± 2.6 kg/m
resultsAttrition rate was higher in MUFA (63 %) than in LF (37 %, P = 0.019) and CTR (42 %, P = 0.09) group. Weight regain in completers was not different between groups (mean ± SEM), MUFA 7.1 ± 2.1 % versus LF 5.6 ± 1.3 % versus CTR 7.2 ± 1.5 %, nor was body fat regain, MUFA 4.8 ± 1.0 % versus LF 4.7 ± 0.8 % versus CTR 5.7 ± 0.6 %. The MUFA group reduced LDL/HDL ratio by -0.47 ± 0.09 compared with -0.23 ± 0.11 in LF (P < 0.05) and 0.06 ± 0.14 (P < 0.005) in CTR groups.
conclusionsWeight regain or body composition did not differ between diets over 18 months. No effects on risk markers for T2D or CVD were found, with the exception of an improvement in the LDL/HDL ratio by the MUFA diet compared to the CTR diet. The LF diet was generally more satisfactory and the MUFA diet seemed more difficult to follow.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.