Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29951214›Full record

ReviewObesity science & practice2018

A narrative review of the construct of hedonic hunger and its measurement by the Power of Food Scale.

H M Espel-Huynh, A F Muratore, M R Lowe

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Obesity science & practice, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Do eating behavior traits predict energy intake and body mass index? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

H M Espel-HuynhDepartment of Psychology Drexel University Philadelphia PA USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8456-3465
A F MuratoreDepartment of Psychology Drexel University Philadelphia PA USA.
M R LoweDepartment of Psychology Drexel University Philadelphia PA USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe term 'hedonic hunger' refers to one's preoccupation with and desire to consume foods for the purposes of pleasure and in the absence of physical hunger. The Power of Food Scale (PFS) was developed as a quantitative measure of this construct in 2009. Since then, over 50 published studies have used the PFS to predict appetite-related outcomes including neural, cognitive, behavioural, anthropometric and clinical measures.

objectiveThis narrative review evaluates how closely the PFS captures the construct it was originally presumed to assess and to more clearly define hedonic hunger itself.

methodsThe measure's relationship to four domains is reviewed and summarized: motivation to consume palatable foods; level of actual consumption of such foods; body mass; and subjective loss-of-control over one's eating behaviour. Findings are synthesized to generate a more accurate understanding of what the PFS measures and how it may relate to the broader definition of hedonic hunger.

resultsResults suggest that the PFS is closely related to motivation to consume palatable foods and, in extreme cases, occurrence of loss-of-control eating episodes. PFS scores are not consistently predictive of amount of food consumed or body mass.

conclusionsImplications of these findings are discussed in the context of behavioural health, and avenues for further inquiry are identified.

Indexed as

Food rewardhedonic hungerloss‐of‐control eatingPower of Food

Identifiers

PMID29951214
PMCPMC6009994

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.