Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28478041›Full record

Trial reportLancet (London, England)2017

Extended and standard duration weight-loss programme referrals for adults in primary care (WRAP): a randomised controlled trial.

Amy L Ahern, Graham M Wheeler, Paul Aveyard, Emma J Boyland, Jason C G Halford, Adrian P Mander, Jennifer Woolston, Ann M Thomson, Melina Tsiountsioura, Darren Cole and 10 more

Erratum issued Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Lancet (London, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT06988904 (EFFECTIVENESS OF THE GROUP-BASED NUTRITION EDUCATION PROGRAMME FOR OBESITY MANAGEMENT IN BERGUEDÀ), which is not on this map. Cited by 128 papers, 14 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
128citing papers in PubMed, 14 pooled it
51.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT06988904 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Effectiveness of the group-based nutrition education programme for obesity management in berguedà: a randomised clinical trial. energy2mob study

TypeinterventionalSponsorFundacio d'Investigacio en Atencio Primaria Jordi Gol i GurinaRan2025 to 2026Enrolled136ConditionsMediterranean Diet, Overweight or Obese Adults, Exercise Therapy, Cardiovascular DiseasesArmsEnergy2MOB
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

128 citing papers in PubMed, 14 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 216 citations in OpenAlex.

  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. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. A systematic review of inequalities in the uptake of, adherence to, and effectiveness of behavioral weight management interventions in adults.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2022
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. The impact of adult behavioural weight management interventions on mental health: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2021
    Pooled it
  12. A systematic review of UK-based long-term nonsurgical interventions for people with severe obesity (BMI ≥35 kg mJournal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2020
    Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

68 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.

Amy L AhernMRC Human Nutrition Research, Cambridge, UK; MRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. Electronic address: ala34@cam.ac.uk.
Graham M WheelerMRC Biostatistics Hub for Trials Methodology Research, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Cancer Research UK and UCL Cancer Trials Centre, University College London, London, UK.
Paul AveyardNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Emma J BoylandDepartment of Psychological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Jason C G HalfordDepartment of Psychological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Adrian P ManderMRC Biostatistics Hub for Trials Methodology Research, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Jennifer WoolstonMRC Human Nutrition Research, Cambridge, UK.
Ann M ThomsonMRC Human Nutrition Research, Cambridge, UK.
Melina TsiountsiouraMRC Human Nutrition Research, Cambridge, UK.
Darren ColeMRC Human Nutrition Research, Cambridge, UK.
Bethan R MeadDepartment of Psychological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Lisa IrvineNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
David TurnerNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Marc SuhrckeNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK; Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK.
Laura PimpinUK Health Forum, London, UK.
Lise RetatUK Health Forum, London, UK.
Abbygail JaccardUK Health Forum, London, UK.
Laura WebberUK Health Forum, London, UK.
Simon R CohnDepartment of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Susan A JebbMRC Human Nutrition Research, Cambridge, UK; Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
MRC Human Nutrition Research · GBUK Health Forum · GBUniversity of Liverpool · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GBUniversity of East Anglia · GBUniversity of Oxford · GBCancer Research UK · GBLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBUniversity of York · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 15953Medical Research Council MC_EX_MR/J000493/1Medical Research Council MC_U105960384Medical Research Council MC_U105960389Medical Research Council MC_UP_1302/2Medical Research Council MC_UU_00002/3Medical Research Council MC_UU_12015/4Medical Research Council MR/J000493/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvidence exist that primary care referral to an open-group behavioural programme is an effective strategy for management of obesity, but little evidence on optimal intervention duration is available. We aimed to establish whether 52-week referral to an open-group weight-management programme would achieve greater weight loss and improvements in a range of health outcomes and be more cost-effective than the current practice of 12-week referrals.

methodsIn this non-blinded, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial, we recruited participants who were aged 18 years or older and had body-mass index (BMI) of 28 kg/m

findingsBetween Oct 18, 2012, and Feb 10, 2014, we enrolled 1269 participants. 1267 eligible participants were randomly assigned to the brief intervention (n=211), the 12-week programme (n=528), and the 52-week programme (n=528). Two participants in the 12-week programme had been found to be ineligible shortly after randomisation and were excluded from the analysis. 823 (65%) of 1267 participants completed an assessment at 1 year and 856 (68%) participants at 2 years. All eligible participants were included in the analyses. At 1 year, mean weight changes in the groups were -3·26 kg (brief intervention), -4·75 kg (12-week programme), and -6·76 kg (52-week programme). Participants in the behavioural programme lost more weight than those in the brief intervention (adjusted difference -2·71 kg, 95% CI -3·86 to -1·55; p<0·0001). The 52-week programme was more effective than the 12-week programme (-2·14 kg, -3·05 to -1·22; p<0·0001). Differences between groups were still significant at 2 years. No adverse events related to the intervention were reported. Over 2 years, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER; compared with brief intervention) was £159 per kg lost for the 52-week programme and £91 per kg for the 12-week programme. Modelled over 25 years after baseline, the ICER for the 12-week programme was dominant compared with the brief intervention. The ICER for the 52-week programme was cost-effective compared with the brief intervention (£2394 per quality-adjusted life-year [QALY]) and the 12-week programme (£3804 per QALY).

interpretationFor adults with overweight or obesity, referral to this open-group behavioural weight-loss programme for at least 12 weeks is more effective than brief advice and self-help materials. A 52-week programme produces greater weight loss and other clinical benefits than a 12-week programme and, although it costs more, modelling suggests that the 52-week programme is cost-effective in the longer term.

fundingNational Prevention Research Initiative, Weight Watchers International (as part of an UK Medical Research Council Industrial Collaboration Award).

Indexed as

AdultAgedBehavior TherapyBody WeightCost-Benefit AnalysisEnglandFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHealth Care CostsHumansMaleMiddle AgedObesityPrimary Health CareQuality of LifeReferral and Consultation

Identifiers

PMID28478041
PMCPMC5459752
OpenAlexW2610544411

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.