Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26767612›Full record

Trial reportAppetite2016

What is eaten when all of the foods at a meal are served in large portions?

Liane S Roe, Samantha M R Kling, Barbara J Rolls

Open access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Appetite, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
11.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Understanding the science of portion control and the art of downsizing.The Proceedings of the Nutrition Society · 2018
    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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Liane S RoeLaboratory for the Study of Human Ingestive Behavior, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
Samantha M R KlingLaboratory for the Study of Human Ingestive Behavior, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
Barbara J RollsLaboratory for the Study of Human Ingestive Behavior, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA. Electronic address: bjr4@psu.edu.
Pennsylvania State University · US

Funding

Environmental Influences on Intake and ObesityR01DK059853 · NIDDK · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY-UNIV PARK · PI ROLLS, BARBARA JEAN · 2001 to 2014
$5.0M
NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK059853
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Portion size affects intake, but when all foods are served in large portions, it is unclear whether every food will be consumed in greater amounts. We varied the portion size (PS) of all foods at a meal to investigate the influence of food energy density (ED) on the PS effect as well as that of palatability and subject characteristics. In a crossover design, 48 women ate lunch in the laboratory on four occasions. The meal had three medium-ED foods (pasta, bread, cake) and three low-ED foods (broccoli, tomatoes, grapes), which were simultaneously varied in PS across meals (100%, 133%, 167%, or 200% of baseline amounts). The results showed that the effect of PS on the weight of food consumed did not differ between medium-ED and low-ED foods (p < 0.0001). Energy intake, however, was substantially affected by food ED across all portions served, with medium-ED foods contributing 86% of energy. Doubling the portions of all foods increased meal energy intake by a mean (±SEM) of 900 ± 117 kJ (215 ± 28 kcal; 34%). As portions were increased, subjects consumed a smaller proportion of the amount served; this response was characterized by a quadratic curve. The strongest predictor of the weight of food consumed was the weight of food served, both for the entire meal (p < 0.0001) and for individual foods (p = 0.014); subject characteristics explained less variability. Intake in response to larger portions was greater for foods that subjects ranked higher in taste (p < 0.0001); rankings were not related to food ED. This study demonstrates the complexity of the PS effect. While the response to PS can vary between individuals, the effect depends primarily on the amounts of foods offered and their palatability compared to other available foods.

Indexed as

Energy IntakeMealsPortion SizeAdultBody WeightCross-Over StudiesEnergy MetabolismFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsMiddle AgedYoung AdultDisinhibitionEnergy densityEnergy intakeFood intakePalatabilityPortion size

Identifiers

PMID26767612
PMCPMC4762726
OpenAlexW2232200568

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.