Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31168928›Full record

Trial reportObesity (Silver Spring, Md.)2019

Measurement Equivalence of E-Scale and In-Person Clinic Weights.

Kinsey Pebley, Robert C Klesges, G Wayne Talcott, Mehmet Kocak, Rebecca A Krukowski

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed
–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

38 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. An Exploratory Analysis of Patterns of Weight Change in a Post-Cessation Weight Management Trial.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2026
    Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. A Postpartum Weight Loss-focused Stepped-care Intervention in a Military Population: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2023
    Trial
  7. A randomized controlled trial to reduce post-cessation weight gain.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2023
    Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  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

5 authors.

Kinsey PebleyDepartment of Psychology, University of Memphis, Memphis, Tennessee, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7497-6247
Robert C KlesgesDepartment of Public Health Sciences, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA.
G Wayne TalcottDepartment of Public Health Sciences, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA.
Mehmet KocakDepartment of Preventive Medicine, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, Tennessee, USA.
Rebecca A KrukowskiDepartment of Preventive Medicine, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, Tennessee, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9193-2783

Funding

Dissemination of the Look Ahead Weight Management Treatment in the MilitaryR01DK097158 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE HEALTH SCI CTR · PI KRUKOWSKI, REBECCA A. · 2012 to 2016
$2.9M
NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK097158
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe current study aimed to determine whether electronic scale (e-scale) weight measurements are concordant with in-person clinic weights.

methodsE-scale and in-person clinic weight measurements from 248 active duty military personnel enrolled in a weight-loss intervention study were used. E-scale and clinic measurements were matched and tested to determine whether measurements were significantly different from each other. Equivalence between the two measurements was tested among the cohort and when stratifying by gender, BMI, race, and age. The study also examined whether matching the times of clinic and e-scale measurements or averaging multiple measurements was optimal, and whether using e-scale and clinic measurements from the same day or across a specified amount of time was acceptable.

resultsOverall, e-scale and clinic measurements were significantly different from each other but did not differ from equality. Additionally, using e-scale and clinic weight measurements that were taken on the same day may be a preferable method compared with using measurements within a week of each other, which leads to weight underprediction among e-scale measurements.

conclusionsE-scales display good measurement concordance. E-scales may be helpful when studying highly mobile populations, such as military personnel, and could potentially eliminate the need for in-person visits.

Indexed as

Body WeightCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleResearch Design

Identifiers

PMID31168928
PMCPMC7575123

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.