Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27405704›Full record

SynthesisThe British journal of nutrition2016

The effect of communicating the genetic risk of cardiometabolic disorders on motivation and actual engagement in preventative lifestyle modification and clinical outcome: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Sherly X Li, Zheng Ye, Kevin Whelan, Helen Truby

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The British journal of nutrition, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Are There Any Effective Behavior Change Strategies for Communicating Genetic Risk in Obesity Prevention and Body Weight Reduction Interventions?Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Personalising dietary advice for disease prevention: concepts and experiences.Pflugers Archiv : European journal of physiology · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

4 authors.

Sherly X Li1Medical Research Council Epidemiology Unit,University of Cambridge,Cambridge CB2 0QQ,UK.
Zheng Ye1Medical Research Council Epidemiology Unit,University of Cambridge,Cambridge CB2 0QQ,UK.
Kevin Whelan2Diabetes and Nutritional Sciences Division,King's College London,London SE1 9NH,UK.
Helen Truby3Department of Nutrition & Dietetics,Monash University,Level 1,264 Ferntree Gully Road,Notting Hill,VIC 3168,Australia.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UU_12015/1Medical Research Council MC_UU_12015/5
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genetic risk prediction of chronic conditions including obesity, diabetes and CVD currently has limited predictive power but its potential to engage healthy behaviour change has been of immense research interest. We aimed to understand whether the latter is indeed true by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis investigating whether genetic risk communication affects motivation and actual behaviour change towards preventative lifestyle modification. We included all randomised controlled trials (RCT) since 2003 investigating the impact of genetic risk communication on health behaviour to prevent cardiometabolic disease, without restrictions on age, duration of intervention or language. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses for perceived motivation for behaviour change and clinical changes (weight loss) and a narrative analysis for other outcomes. Within the thirteen studies reviewed, five were vignette studies (hypothetical RCT) and seven were clinical RCT. There was no consistent effect of genetic risk on actual motivation for weight loss, perceived motivation for dietary change (control v. genetic risk group standardised mean difference (smd) -0·15; 95 % CI -1·03, 0·73, P=0·74) or actual change in dietary behaviour. Similar results were observed for actual weight loss (control v. high genetic risk SMD 0·29 kg; 95 % CI -0·74, 1·31, P=0·58). This review found no clear or consistent evidence that genetic risk communication alone either raises motivation or translates into actual change in dietary intake or physical activity to reduce the risk of cardiometabolic disorders in adults. Of thirteen studies, eight were at high or unclear risk of bias. Additional larger-scale, high-quality clinical RCT are warranted.

Indexed as

Cardiovascular DiseasesDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2HumansObesityRisk FactorsBehaviour changeCardiometabolic disordersDTC direct-to-consumerGenetic riskRCT randomised controlled trialSMD standardised mean differenceSystematic reviewsT2D type 2 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID27405704
PMCPMC4983776

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.