Trial reportBMC public health2019
Evaluating differences in the clinical impact of a free online weight loss programme, a resource-intensive commercial weight loss programme and an active control condition: a parallel randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of the Health Coaching Quality Index: A Proposed Method for Evaluating Health Coaching Interventions.International journal of behavioral medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Medical Nutrition Therapy Interventions Provided by Dietitians for Adult Overweight and Obesity Management: An Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Evidence-Based Practice Guideline.Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics · 2023Guideline
- Testing the short-term effectiveness of primary care referral to online weight loss programmes: A randomised controlled trial.Clinical obesity · 2021Trial
- Personal Experiences and Preferences for Weight-Management Services from Adults Living with Overweight and Obesity in the United Kingdom.Nutrients · 2024Article
- Pilot evaluation of a behavioral weight loss program for adults with physical disabilities: State of Slim Everybody usability and feasibility.Obesity science & practice · 2024Article
- Weight Management Interventions Provided by a Dietitian for Adults with Overweight or Obesity: An Evidence Analysis Center Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics · 2023Article
- Review
- Dissemination and implementation strategies for physical activity guidelines among adults with disability, chronic conditions, and pregnancy: a systematic scoping review.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Constant Daily Exercise to Keep the Doctor Away: A Study of Adherence to Physical Exercise Using a Gym in Individuals Older Than 55 Years.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2021Article
- Foresight for the Fitness Sector: Results from a European Delphi Study and Its Relevance in the Time of COVID-19.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFinding effective intervention strategies to combat rising obesity levels could significantly reduce the burden that obesity and associated non-communicable diseases places on both individuals and the National Health Service.
methodsIn this parallel randomised-controlled trial, 76 participants who are overweight or obese (50 female) were given free access to a fitness centre for the duration of the 12-week intervention and randomised to one of three interventions. The commercial intervention, the Healthy Weight Programme, (HWP, n = 25, 10/15 men/women) consisted of twelve 1-h nutrition coaching sessions with a nutritionist delivered as a mixture of group and 1 to 1 sessions. In addition, twice-weekly exercise sessions (24 in total) were delivered by personal trainers for 12 weeks. The NHS intervention (n = 25, 8/17 men/women) consisted of following an entirely self-managed 12-week online NHS resource. The GYM intervention (n = 26, 8/18 men/women) received no guidance or formal intervention. All participants were provided with a gym induction for safety and both the NHS and GYM participants were familiarised with ACSM physical activity guidelines by way of a hand-out.
resultsThe overall follow-up rate was 83%. Body mass was significantly reduced at post-intervention in all groups (HWP: N = 18, - 5.17 ± 4.22 kg, NHS: N = 21-4.19 ± 5.49 kg; GYM: N = 24-1.17 ± 3.00 kg; p < 0.001) with greater reductions observed in HWP and NHS groups compared to GYM (p < 0.05). Out with body mass and BMI, there were no additional statistically significant time x intervention interaction effects.
conclusionsThis is the first study to evaluate the efficacy of both a free online NHS self-help weight-loss tool and a commercial weight loss programme that provides face-to-face nutritional support and supervised exercise. The findings suggest that both interventions are superior to an active control condition with regard to eliciting short-term weight-loss.
trial registrationISRCTN Registry - ISRCTN31489026. Prospectively registered: 27/07/16.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.