Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31575569›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

The NoHoW protocol: a multicentre 2×2 factorial randomised controlled trial investigating an evidence-based digital toolkit for weight loss maintenance in European adults.

Sarah Ellen Scott, Cristiana Duarte, Jorge Encantado, Elizabeth H Evans, Marja Harjumaa, Berit Lilienthal Heitmann, Graham W Horgan, Sofus C Larsen, Marta Moreira Marques, Elina Mattila and 11 more

Abstract readClinical Trial Protocol
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Review
  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

21 authors.

Sarah Ellen ScottSchool of Psychology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8168-7064
Cristiana DuarteSchool of Psychology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Jorge EncantadoFaculty of Human Kinetics, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal.
Elizabeth H EvansInstitute of Health & Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Marja HarjumaaVTT, VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, Ltd, Espoo, Finland.
Berit Lilienthal HeitmannResearch Unit for Dietary Studies, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, The Parker Institut, Frederiksberg, The Capital Region, Denmark.
Graham W HorganBioSS, Biomathematics and Statistics Scotland, Aberdeen, UK.
Sofus C LarsenResearch Unit for Dietary Studies, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, The Parker Institut, Frederiksberg, The Capital Region, Denmark.
Marta Moreira MarquesFaculty of Human Kinetics, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal.
Elina MattilaVTT, VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, Ltd, Espoo, Finland.
Marcela MatosCenter for Research in Neuropsychology and Cognitive Behavioral Intervention, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.
Marie-Louise MikkelsenResearch Unit for Dietary Studies, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, The Parker Institut, Frederiksberg, The Capital Region, Denmark.
António L PalmeiraFaculty of Human Kinetics, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal.
Beth PearsonSchool of Psychology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Lauren RamseySchool of Psychology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Kirby SainsburyInstitute of Health & Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Inês SantosFaculty of Human Kinetics, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal.
Falko SniehottaInstitute of Health & Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Carol StalkerCollege of Life and Natural Sciences, University of Derby, Derby, UK.
P J TeixeiraFaculty of Human Kinetics, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal.
R James StubbsSchool of Psychology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK r.j.stubbs@leeds.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionObesity and associated diseases place a severe burden on healthcare systems. Behavioural interventions for weight loss (WL) are successful in the short term but often result in weight regain over time. Self-regulation of eating and activity behaviours may significantly enhance weight loss maintenance (WLM) and may be effectively augmented by contextual behavioural approaches to emotion regulation. The NoHoW trial tests the efficacy of a theoretically informed, evidence-based digital toolkit using a mobile-enabled website, activity trackers and Wi-Fi scales for WLM aiming to target (1) self-regulation and motivation, and (2) emotion regulation in adults who achieved clinically significant (≥5%) WL in the previous 12 months (initial body mass index (BMI) ≥25 kg/m METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study is an 18-month, 3-centre, 2×2 factorial single-blind, randomised controlled trial, which recruited 1627 participants achieving ≥5% WL between March 2017 and March 2018. Participants are randomly allocated to one of four arms: (1) self-monitoring only (self-weighing and activity tracker), (2) self-regulation and motivation, (3) emotion regulation or (4) combined self-regulation, motivation and emotion regulation. Participants attend four clinical investigation days at 0, 6, 12 and 18 months and are instructed to use the digital toolkit for 18 weeks during the first 6 months and at their discretion for the remaining 12 months. The primary outcome is change in weight (kg) at 12 months from baseline. Secondary outcomes are body composition (eg, bioimpedance analysis), health biomarkers (glycated haemoglobin, lipids, blood pressure, hair cortisol), dietary intake, physical activity, sleep, motivational, self-regulatory, emotion regulatory moderators/mediators of WLM, engagement, user experience, acceptability and cost-effectiveness of the interventions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was granted by Institutional Ethics Committees at the Universities of Leeds (17-0082; 27 February 2017), Lisbon (17/2016; 20 February 2017) and Capital Region of Denmark (H-16030495, 8 March 2017). Results will be published in scientific journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN88405328.

Indexed as

Body Weight MaintenanceAdultBody CompositionCost-Benefit AnalysisEmotional RegulationEvidence-Based PracticeExerciseFemaleHumansMaleMobile ApplicationsMotivationMulticenter Studies as TopicRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSelf-ControlWeight LossBehaviour changeDigital healthEmotion regulationMotivationSelf-regulationWeight loss maintenance

Identifiers

PMID31575569
PMCPMC6773359

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.