Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29338951›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of preventive medicine2018

Small Incentives Improve Weight Loss in Women From Disadvantaged Backgrounds.

Tricia M Leahey, Jessica Gokee LaRose, Marc S Mitchell, Carnisha M Gilder, Rena R Wing

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of preventive medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Promoting healthy behaviour with financial incentives: three challenges and solutions for large scale implementation.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Tricia M LeaheyDepartment of Allied Health Sciences, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut. Electronic address: tricia.leahey@uconn.edu.
Jessica Gokee LaRoseDepartment of Health Behavior and Policy, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, Virginia.
Marc S MitchellDepartment of Kinesiology, Western University, Ontario, Canada.
Carnisha M GilderDepartment of Allied Health Sciences, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut.
Rena R WingDepartment of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.
University of Connecticut · USBrown University · USVirginia Commonwealth University · USWestern University · CA

Funding

A State-Wide Initiative to Spread Effective Behavioral Weight Loss StrategiesR18DK083248 · NIDDK · MIRIAM HOSPITAL · PI WING, RENA R · 2010 to 2013
$1.8M
NIDDK NIH HHS R18 DK083248
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionWomen from lower-income backgrounds have the highest rates of obesity. Thus, effective programs for this high-risk population are urgently needed. Evidence suggests that adding financial incentives to treatment helps to engage and promote health behavior change in lower-income populations; however, this has never been tested in women for obesity treatment. The purpose of this study was to examine whether adding small financial incentives to Internet weight loss treatment yields better weight loss outcomes in women from lower-income backgrounds compared with the same treatment without incentives. Weight losses in lower-versus higher-income women were also compared.

methodsData were pooled from two randomized trials in which women (N=264) received either Internet behavioral weight loss treatment (IBWL) or IBWL plus incentives (IBWL+$). Weight was objectively assessed. Data were collected and analyzed from 2011 to 2017.

resultsWomen from lower-income backgrounds had significantly better weight loss outcomes in IBWL+$ compared with IBWL alone (6.4 [SD=4.9%] vs 2.6 [SD=4.6%], p=0.01). Moreover, a greater percentage achieved a ≥5% weight loss in IBWL+$ vs IBWL alone (52.6% vs 38.1%, p=0.01). Interestingly, the comparison between lower-income versus higher-income groups showed that, in IBWL alone, women with lower income achieved significantly poorer weight losses (3.4 [SD=4.2%] vs 4.9 [SD=4.0%], p=0.03). By contrast, in IBWL+$, weight loss outcomes did not differ by income status (5.0 [SD=5.6%] vs 5.3 [SD=3.8%], p=0.80), and a similar percentage of lower- versus higher-income women achieved a ≥5% weight loss (52.6% vs 53.8%, p=0.93).

conclusionsAn Internet behavioral weight loss program plus financial incentives may be an effective strategy to promote excellent weight losses in women with lower income, thereby enhancing equity in treatment outcomes in a vulnerable, high-risk population. These data also provide important evidence to support federally funded incentive initiatives for lower-income, underserved populations.

Indexed as

MotivationAdultBehavior TherapyFemaleFinancing, GovernmentHealth BehaviorHumansIncomeInternetMiddle AgedObesityPovertyProgram EvaluationRisk FactorsTreatment OutcomeUnited States

Identifiers

PMID29338951
PMCPMC5818321
OpenAlexW2783178359

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.