Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29259794›Full record

ArticleObesity science & practice2017

Weight loss and frequency of body-weight self-monitoring in an online commercial weight management program with and without a cellular-connected 'smart' scale: a randomized pilot study.

J G Thomas, H A Raynor, D S Bond, A K Luke, C C Cardoso, A C Wojtanowski, S Vander Veur, D Tate, R R Wing, G D Foster

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Obesity science & practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. An Evaluation of Alternative Technology-Supported Counseling Approaches to Promote Multiple Lifestyle Behavior Changes in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Chronic Kidney Disease.Journal of renal nutrition : the official journal of the Council on Renal Nutrition of the National Kidney Foundation · 2023
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  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

10 authors.

J G ThomasDepartment of Psychiatry and Human Behavior Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, The Miriam Hospital/Weight Control and Diabetes Research Center Providence RI USA.
H A RaynorDepartment of Nutrition University of Tennessee Knoxville TN USA.
D S BondDepartment of Psychiatry and Human Behavior Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, The Miriam Hospital/Weight Control and Diabetes Research Center Providence RI USA.
A K LukeDepartment of Psychiatry and Human Behavior Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, The Miriam Hospital/Weight Control and Diabetes Research Center Providence RI USA.
C C CardosoDepartment of Nutrition University of Tennessee Knoxville TN USA.
A C WojtanowskiWeight Watchers International, Inc. New York City NY USA.
S Vander VeurWeight Watchers International, Inc. New York City NY USA.
D TateDepartment of Health Behavior University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Chapel Hill NC USA.
R R WingDepartment of Psychiatry and Human Behavior Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, The Miriam Hospital/Weight Control and Diabetes Research Center Providence RI USA.
G D FosterWeight Watchers International, Inc. New York City NY USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Evaluate the effects of an online commercial weight management program, with and without provision of a 'smart' scale with instructions to weigh daily and weekly tailored feedback, on weight loss and the frequency of body-weight self-monitoring. Methods: Participants (N = 92; body mass index 27-40 kg/m Results: While both groups achieved statistically significant weight loss, mean ± standard error weight loss did not differ between WWO-E and WWO at 3 months (5.1 ± 0.6 kg vs. 4.0 ± 0.7 kg, respectively; p = 0.257) or 6 months (5.3 ± 0.6 kg vs. 3.9 ± 0.7 kg, respectively; p = 0.116). However, a greater proportion of WWO-E lost ≥5% of initial body weight at 3 months (52.2% vs. 28.3%; p = 0.033), but not 6 months (43.5% vs. 30.4%; p = 0.280), compared with WWO. Mean ± standard deviation days with self-monitored weight was higher in WWO-E (80.5 ± 5.6; 44.7% of days) than WWO (12.0 ± 1.0; 6.7% of days; p < 0.001) across the 6-month study period. Conclusions: This is the first study to show that provision of a 'smart' scale with weekly tailored feedback substantially increased the frequency of self-weighing and the proportion of participants achieving an initial clinically significant ≥5% weight loss (52% vs. 28%) in an online commercial weight management program. Both WWO and WWO-E produced significant weight loss over 6 months. While mean weight losses were slightly greater in the enhanced group, the difference was not statistically significant in this small sample. This study provides support for the clinical utility of online commercial weight management programs and the potential for supporting technology such as 'smart' scales to improve adherence to body-weight self-monitoring and clinical outcomes.

Indexed as

dieteHealthobesityphysical activityweight loss

Identifiers

PMID29259794
PMCPMC5729493

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.