Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28877558›Full record

Trial reportClinical obesity2017

Social status and energy intake: a randomized controlled experiment.

G Pavela, D W Lewis, J A Dawson, M Cardel, D B Allison

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical obesity, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

5 authors.

G PavelaDepartment of Health Behavior, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5750-4021
D W LewisCommunity and Rural Medicine, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, USA.
J A DawsonDepartment of Nutritional Sciences, College of Human Sciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, USA.
M CardelHealth Outcomes & Policy Faculty, Institute for Child Health Policy, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
D B AllisonNutrition Obesity Research Center, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.

Funding

Why is the prevalence of obesity so high in U.S. Southern States? Regional predictors of BMI and obesity treatment response.P30DK056336 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI Gareth R Dutton · 2000 to 2026
$31.9M
University of Alabama at Birmingham's Diabetes Research CenterP30DK079626 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI Stuart J Frank · 2013 to 2026
$19.5M
UAB Obesity Training ProgramT32DK062710 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI James O Hill, Brooks C Wingo · 2004 to 2026
$5.5M
NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK056336NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK079626NIDDK NIH HHS T32 DK062710
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While the inverse association between socioeconomic status (SES) and obesity in high gross domestic product countries is well established using observational data, the extent to which the association is due to a true causal effect of SES and, if so, the mechanisms of this effect remain incompletely known. To assess the influence of social status on obesity via energy intake, we randomized individuals to a higher or lower social status and observed subsequent energy intake. College students between the ages of 18 and 25 were randomized to social status and were operationalized as being a leader or follower in a partner activity as purportedly determined by a (bogus) test of leadership ability. Investigators were blinded to treatment assignment. Immediately after being told their leadership assignment, paired participants were provided with platters of food. Energy intake was objectively measured in kilocalories (kcal) consumed, and paired t-tests were used to test for significant differences in intake between leaders and followers. A total of 60 participants were included in the final analysis (males = 28, females = 32). Overall, no difference in energy intake was observed between leaders and followers, consuming an average of 575.3 and 579.8 kcal, respectively (diff = 4.5 kcal, P = 0.94). The null hypothesis of no effect of social status, operationalized as assignment to a leadership position in a small-group activity, on energy intake was not rejected.

Indexed as

Energy IntakeSocial ClassAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansMaleObesitySocial StigmaYoung AdultEnergy Intakeobesitysocial statussocioeconomic status

Identifiers

PMID28877558
PMCPMC5604843

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.