Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27838443›Full record

Trial reportAppetite2017

Training response inhibition to reduce food consumption: Mechanisms, stimulus specificity and appropriate training protocols.

Rachel C Adams, Natalia S Lawrence, Frederick Verbruggen, Christopher D Chambers

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Appetite, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04450524 (Changing Eating Behavior Using Cognitive Training), which is not on this map. Cited by 31 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing 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.

NCT04450524 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Changing Eating Behavior Using Cognitive Training: A Randomized Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorBabes-Bolyai UniversityRan2020 to 2021Enrolled135ConditionsObesity, Overweight, Weight LossArmsHypnosis, Food inhibition training, Control
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Does alcohol cue inhibitory control training survive a context shift?Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors · 2020
    Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  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.

Rachel C AdamsSchool of Psychology and Cardiff University Brain Research Imaging Centre, Cardiff University, Park Place, Cardiff CF10 3AT, UK. Electronic address: adamsrc1@cardiff.ac.uk.
Natalia S LawrenceSchool of Psychology and Cardiff University Brain Research Imaging Centre, Cardiff University, Park Place, Cardiff CF10 3AT, UK; School of Psychology, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter EX4 4QG, UK. Electronic address: Natalia.Lawrence@exeter.ac.uk.
Frederick VerbruggenSchool of Psychology, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter EX4 4QG, UK. Electronic address: F.L.J.Verbruggen@exeter.ac.uk.
Christopher D ChambersSchool of Psychology and Cardiff University Brain Research Imaging Centre, Cardiff University, Park Place, Cardiff CF10 3AT, UK. Electronic address: Chambersc1@cardiff.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Training individuals to inhibit their responses towards unhealthy foods has been shown to reduce food intake relative to a control group. Here we aimed to further explore these effects by investigating the role of stimulus devaluation, training protocol, and choice of control group. Restrained eaters received either inhibition or control training using a modified version of either the stop-signal or go/no-go task. Following training we measured implicit attitudes towards food (Study 1) and food consumption (Studies 1 and 2). In Study 1 we used a modified stop-signal training task with increased demands on top-down control (using a tracking procedure and feedback to maintain competition between the stop and go processes). With this task, we found no evidence for an effect of training on implicit attitudes or food consumption, with Bayesian inferential analyses revealing substantial evidence for the null hypothesis. In Study 2 we removed the feedback in the stop-signal training to increase the rate of successful inhibition and revealed a significant effect of both stop-signal and go/no-go training on food intake (compared to double-response and go training, respectively) with a greater difference in consumption in the go/no-go task, compared with the stop-signal task. However, results from an additional passive control group suggest that training effects could be partly caused by increased consumption in the go control group whereas evidence for reduced consumption in the inhibition groups was inconclusive. Our findings therefore support evidence that inhibition training tasks with higher rates of inhibition accuracy are more effective, but prompt caution for interpreting the efficacy of laboratory-based inhibition training as an intervention for behaviour change.

Indexed as

Choice BehaviorConditioning, ClassicalInhibition, PsychologicalAdolescentAdultBayes TheoremCuesEatingFeeding BehaviorFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedYoung AdultCognitive trainingDietary restraintFood intakeImplicit attitudesResponse inhibition

Identifiers

PMID27838443
PMCPMC5240656

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.