Trial reportObesity facts2017
A Structured, Manual-Based Low-Level Intervention vs. Treatment as Usual Evaluated in a Randomized Controlled Trial for Adolescents with Extreme Obesity - the STEREO Trial.
Trial report in Obesity facts, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Do adolescents with extreme obesity differ according to previous treatment seeking behavior? The Youth with Extreme obesity Study (YES) cohort.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 9 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo compare efficacy and safety of a manual-based low-level psychological intervention with treatment as usual (weight loss treatment).
methodsA two-armed randomized controlled trial without blinding and computer-based stratified block randomization included adolescents and young adults (14.0-24.9 years) with a BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 at five German university hospitals. Primary outcomes were adherence (participation rate ≥ 5/6 sessions) and quality of life (DISABKIDS-37) 6 months after randomization. Secondary outcomes included depression, self-esteem, and perceived stress scores.
resultsOf 397 screened adolescents, 119 (mean BMI 40.4 ± 7.0 kg/m2, 49.6% female) were randomized to the manual-based low-level intervention (n = 59) or treatment as usual (n = 60). We observed no group difference for adherence (absolute risk reduction 0.4%, 95% CI -14.7% to 15.5%; p = 1.0) or health-related quality of life (score difference 8.1, 95% CI -2.1 to 18.3; p = 0.11). Among all secondary outcomes, we detected explorative evidence for an effect on the DISABKIDS-37 'social exclusion' subscale (score difference 15.5; 95% CI 1.6-29.4; p = 0.03). 18/19 adverse events occurred in 26 participants, none were classified as serious.
conclusionAdherence to a coping-oriented intervention was comparable to weight loss treatment, although it was weak in both interventions. Psychological interventions may help to overcome social isolation; further confirmation is required.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.