Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33098278›Full record

Trial reportObesity (Silver Spring, Md.)2020

Counselor Surveillance of Digital Self-Monitoring Data: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.

Meghan L Butryn, Mary K Martinelli, Nicole T Crane, Kathryn Godfrey, Savannah R Roberts, Fengqing Zhang, Evan M Forman

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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.

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

15 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. Article
  8. Article
  9. [Application of Digital Nutrition Technologies in Adult Weight Management].Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

7 authors.

Meghan L ButrynDepartment of Psychology and WELL Center, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Mary K MartinelliDepartment of Psychology and WELL Center, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Nicole T CraneDepartment of Psychology and WELL Center, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Kathryn GodfreyDepartment of Psychology and WELL Center, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Savannah R RobertsDepartment of Psychology and WELL Center, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Fengqing ZhangDepartment of Psychology and WELL Center, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Evan M FormanDepartment of Psychology and WELL Center, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7233-1384

Funding

Improving Weight Loss Maintenance by Using Digital Data Sharing to Provide Responsive Support and AccountabilityR21DK112741 · NIDDK · DREXEL UNIVERSITY · PI BUTRYN, MEGHAN · 2017 to 2018
$425k
NIDDK NIH HHS R21 DK112741NIDDK NIH HHS R21DK112741
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis pilot study tested counselor access to participants' digital self-monitoring (SM) data as a means of improving long-term lifestyle modification (LM) outcomes.

methodsAfter 12 weeks of weight-loss treatment, participants (N = 77) were randomized to LM or LM+SHARE for weeks 13 to 52. All participants received monthly phone calls and weekly text messages from weeks 13 to 52 and were instructed to engage in daily digital SM of weight, eating, and exercise. In LM+SHARE, but not LM, counselors had access to SM device data. Assessments were conducted as weeks 0, 13, 26, and 52.

resultsRetention, engagement, and treatment satisfaction were excellent. LM+SHARE participants, compared with LM, had more frequent SM of weight and eating. Weight loss continued at a similar rate in both conditions from weeks 13 to 26. From weeks 26 to 52, those in LM regained approximately 2 kg, whereas those in LM+SHARE maintained weight loss, a significant difference. Nonetheless, total weight loss did not significantly differ by condition. Engagement in dietary SM mediated the effect of condition on weight.

conclusionsCounselor access to SM data is feasible and acceptable. Additional research is warranted to determine whether it can meaningfully improve outcomes.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedCounselorsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPilot ProjectsSelf-ManagementTelemedicineWatchful WaitingWeight LossYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID33098278
PMCPMC8628117

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.