Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27028279›Full record

SynthesisObesity (Silver Spring, Md.)2016

Weight change among people randomized to minimal intervention control groups in weight loss trials.

David J Johns, Jamie Hartmann-Boyce, Susan A Jebb, Paul Aveyard, Behavioural Weight Management Review Group

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 2 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.

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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Impact of weight-loss interventions on psoriasis severity: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

David J JohnsMedical Research Council Human Nutrition Research, Elsie Widdowson Laboratory, Cambridge, UK.
Jamie Hartmann-BoyceDepartment of Primary Care Health Sciences, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Susan A JebbMedical Research Council Human Nutrition Research, Elsie Widdowson Laboratory, Cambridge, UK.
Paul Aveyard
Behavioural Weight Management Review Group

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_U105960389Medical Research Council U105960389
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveEvidence on the effectiveness of behavioral weight management programs often comes from uncontrolled program evaluations. These frequently make the assumption that, without intervention, people will gain weight. The aim of this study was to use data from minimal intervention control groups in randomized controlled trials to examine the evidence for this assumption and the effect of frequency of weighing on weight change.

methodsData were extracted from minimal intervention control arms in a systematic review of multicomponent behavioral weight management programs. Two reviewers classified control arms into three categories based on intensity of minimal intervention and calculated 12-month mean weight change using baseline observation carried forward. Meta-regression was conducted in STATA v12.

resultsThirty studies met the inclusion criteria, twenty-nine of which had usable data, representing 5,963 participants allocated to control arms. Control arms were categorized according to intensity, as offering leaflets only, a single session of advice, or more than one session of advice from someone without specialist skills in supporting weight loss. Mean weight change at 12 months across all categories was -0.8 kg (95% CI -1.1 to -0.4). In an unadjusted model, increasing intensity by moving up a category was associated with an additional weight loss of -0.53 kg (95% CI -0.96 to -0.09). Also in an unadjusted model, each additional weigh-in was associated with a weight change of -0.42 kg (95% CI -0.81 to -0.03). However, when both variables were placed in the same model, neither intervention category nor number of weigh-ins was associated with weight change.

conclusionsUncontrolled evaluations of weight loss programs should assume that, in the absence of intervention, their population would weigh up to a kilogram on average less than baseline at the end of the first year of follow-up.

Indexed as

Control GroupsWeight LossHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicWeight Reduction Programs

Identifiers

PMID27028279
PMCPMC4820081

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.