Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28500022›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2017

What Matters in Weight Loss? An In-Depth Analysis of Self-Monitoring.

Stefanie Lynn Painter, Rezwan Ahmed, James O Hill, Robert F Kushner, Richard Lindquist, Scott Brunning, Amy Margulies

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

51 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Do routinized eating behaviors support weight loss? An examination of food logs from behavioral weight loss participants.Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
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

7 authors.

Stefanie Lynn PainterRetrofit INC, Chicago, IL, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-7656-5970
Rezwan AhmedRetrofit, INC, Chicago, IL, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-8662-0651
James O HillUniversity of Colorado, Aurora, CO, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-4690-2264
Robert F KushnerNorthwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-1380-3705
Richard LindquistSwedish Medical Center, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-5302-4503
Scott BrunningRetrofit, INC, Chicago, IL, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-4454-8556
Amy MarguliesRetrofit, INC, Chicago, IL, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-3287-5974

Funding

PILOT STUDY--SUBSTRATE METABOLISM IN EXTREMELY LOW BIRTH WEIGHT INFANTSP30DK048520 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI JANINE A HIGGINS · 1995 to 2026
$32.6M
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUsing technology to self-monitor body weight, dietary intake, and physical activity is a common practice used by consumers and health companies to increase awareness of current and desired behaviors in weight loss. Understanding how to best use the information gathered by these relatively new methods needs to be further explored.

objectiveThe purpose of this study was to analyze the contribution of self-monitoring to weight loss in participants in a 6-month commercial weight-loss intervention administered by Retrofit and to specifically identify the significant contributors to weight loss that are associated with behavior and outcomes.

methodsA retrospective analysis was performed using 2113 participants enrolled from 2011 to 2015 in a Retrofit weight-loss program. Participants were males and females aged 18 years or older with a starting body mass index of ≥25 kg/m2, who also provided a weight measurement at the sixth month of the program. Multiple regression analysis was performed using all measures of self-monitoring behaviors involving weight measurements, dietary intake, and physical activity to predict weight loss at 6 months. Each significant predictor was analyzed in depth to reveal the impact on outcome.

resultsParticipants in the Retrofit Program lost a mean -5.58% (SE 0.12) of their baseline weight with 51.87% (1096/2113) of participants losing at least 5% of their baseline weight. Multiple regression model (R

conclusionsThe self-monitoring behaviors of self-weigh-in, daily steps, high-intensity activity, and persistent food logging were significant predictors of weight loss during a 6-month intervention.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultExerciseFemaleHumansMaleObesityRetrospective StudiesSelf-ManagementWeight LossYoung Adultbehaviorbody mass indexfitness trackersobesityoverweightself-monitoringweight loss

Identifiers

PMID28500022
PMCPMC5446667

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.