Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29086484›Full record

ArticleObesity (Silver Spring, Md.)2017

Back to Basics? No Weight Loss from Motivational Interviewing Compared to Nutrition Psychoeducation at One-Year Follow-Up.

Rachel D Barnes, Valentina Ivezaj, Steve Martino, Brian P Pittman, Carlos M Grilo

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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.

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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rachel D BarnesDepartment of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0826-6765
Valentina IvezajDepartment of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
Steve MartinoDepartment of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
Brian P PittmanDepartment of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
Carlos M GriloDepartment of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9727-905X
Yale University · US

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
Mid-Career Investigator Award in Eating and WeightK24DK070052 · NIDDK · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI GRILO, CARLOS M · 2005 to 2015
$1.4M
Examining Innovative Obesity Treatment and Related Novel ConstructsK23DK092279 · NIDDK · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI BARNES, RACHEL D · 2011 to 2015
$780k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863NIDDK NIH HHS K23 DK092279NIDDK NIH HHS K24 DK070052
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWeight loss interventions have begun to receive increasing attention in primary care. Motivational interviewing (MI) is compatible with primary care because it requires relatively limited time and resources. Few studies, however, have examined the long-term impact of MI for weight loss in primary care, and none have used attention-control comparisons. This study was the first randomized controlled trial with a 12-month follow-up of two Web-supported interventions: motivational interviewing and internet condition (MIC) and nutrition psychoeducation and internet condition (NPC).

methodsFifty-nine patients with overweight or obesity, with and without binge-eating disorder (BED), were randomized to treatments and assessed at 12-month follow-up after completing 3-month treatments in primary care (15 months total).

resultsMixed models examining weight loss at 12 months revealed a group and time interaction effect trend (P = 0.054; d' = 0.57). Secondary end point analysis showed a decrease (-1.7%) versus an increase (1.3%) in weight at 12 months among NPC and MIC patients, respectively (P = 0.056; d' = 0.57). Overall, 5 of 44 (11.4%) participants lost or maintained 5% weight losses; differences between treatments were not significant. BED status did not impact weight loss.

conclusionsTwo brief and scalable weight loss interventions resulted in small effect sizes for weight loss 12 months following treatment conclusion. Because MIC required significantly more resources for adequate implementation, NPC may be more cost-effective.

Indexed as

AdultAgedFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedMotivational InterviewingObesityOverweightTreatment OutcomeWeight LossYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID29086484
PMCPMC5705439
OpenAlexW2765401045

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.