Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30587407›Full record

ReviewClinical psychology review2019

Neural vulnerability factors for obesity.

Eric Stice, Kyle Burger

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical psychology review, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05347914 (Mobile Mindfulness Intervention to Reduce Non-Homeostatic Food Cravings in Emotional Eaters), which is not on this map. Cited by 74 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
74citing papers in PubMed, 3 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.

NCT05347914 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Mobile Mindfulness Intervention to Reduce Non-Homeostatic Food Cravings in Emotional Eaters: Research Pilot

TypeinterventionalSponsorMcGill UniversityRan2022 to 2023Enrolled49ConditionsEmotional EatingArmsMindfulness
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

74 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

14 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

Eric SticeOregon Research Institute, Eugene, OR, USA. Electronic address: estice@ori.org.
Kyle BurgerUniversity of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.

Funding

UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CLINICAL NUTRITION RESEARCH UNITP30DK056350 · NIDDK · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Ian Michael Carroll · 1999 to 2026
$31.6M
Relation of Consummatory and Anticipatory Food Reward to ObesityR01DK080760 · NIDDK · OREGON RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI STICE, ERIC M, YOKUM, SONJA · 2009 to 2013
$3.3M
An fMRI Test of the Dynamic Vulnerability Model of Obesity: Risk Factor PlasticitR01DK092468 · NIDDK · OREGON RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI STICE, ERIC M · 2012 to 2016
$2.8M
Translational Neuroscience: Response Training for Obesity Treatment.R01DK112762 · NIDDK · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI STICE, ERIC M · 2017 to 2021
$2.4M
NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK056350NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK080760NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK092468NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK112762
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multiple theories identify neural vulnerability factors that may increase risk for overeating and weight gain. Early cross-sectional neuroimaging studies were unable to determine whether aberrant neural responsivity was a risk factor for or a consequence of overeating. More recent obesity risk, prospective, repeated-measures, and experimental neuroimaging studies with humans have advanced knowledge of etiologic processes and neural plasticity resulting from overeating. Herein, we review evidence from these more rigorous human neuroimaging studies, in conjunction with behavioral measures reflecting neural function, as well as experiments with animals that investigated neural vulnerability theories for overeating. Findings provide support for the reward surfeit theory that posits that individuals at risk for obesity initially show hyper-responsivity of reward circuitry to high-calorie food tastes, which theoretically drives elevated intake of such foods. However, findings provide little support for the reward deficit theory that postulates that individuals at risk for obesity show an initial hypo-responsivity of reward circuitry that motives overeating. Further, results provide support for the incentive sensitization and dynamic vulnerability theories that propose that overconsumption of high-calorie foods results in increased reward and attention region responsivity to cues that are associated with hedonic reward from intake of these high-calorie foods via conditioning, as well as a simultaneous decrease in reward region responsivity to high-calorie food tastes. However, there is little evidence that this induced reduction in reward region response to high-calorie food tastes drives an escalation in overeating. Finally, results provide support for the theory that an initial deficit in inhibitory control and a bias for immediate reward contribute to overconsumption of high-calorie foods. Findings imply that interventions that reduce reward and attention region responsivity to food cues and increase inhibitory control should reduce overeating and excessive weight gain, an intervention theory that is receiving support in randomized trials.

Indexed as

BrainFeeding BehaviorHumansNeuroimagingObesityfMRIObesityProspectiveReward circuitryWeight gain

Identifiers

PMID30587407
PMCPMC6397091

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.