SynthesisAdvances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.)2021
Health Coaching Strategies for Weight Loss: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 3 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Development of the Health Coaching Quality Index: A Proposed Method for Evaluating Health Coaching Interventions.International journal of behavioral medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Occupational Health of Health-Care Workers with Overnutrition: Scoping Review with Meta-Analysis.Nutrients · 2023Pooled it
- Effectiveness of Combined Health Coaching and Self-Monitoring Apps on Weight-Related Outcomes in People With Overweight and Obesity: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Pooled it
- An addiction-based digital weight loss intervention: A multi-centre randomized controlled trial.Pediatric obesity · 2023Trial
- A Qualitative Study Exploring Diabetes Prevention Intervention Needs and Ideas Among Young Adults at High Risk for Diabetes.Journal of nutrition education and behavior · 2026Article
- Lifestyle Medicine for Obesity in the Era of Highly Effective Anti-Obesity Treatment.Nutrients · 2025Review
- Integrating mind-body processes and motivational interviewing in health coaching: enhancing support for health behavior change.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Association between Quality of Life, Confinement, and Sex in Adults: A Multigroup Structural Equation Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Health Coaching for Weight Loss Among Overweight and Obese Individuals in Saudi Arabia: A Retrospective Analysis.Cureus · 2023Article
- From Young to Older, the 4 Phases Method Is Efficient in Promoting Quick Weight, BMI, and Waist Circumference Reductions.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- The Use of Artificial Intelligence-Based Conversational Agents (Chatbots) for Weight Loss: Scoping Review and Practical Recommendations.JMIR medical informatics · 2022Article
- Comment on "Health Coaching: 100 Strategies for Weight Loss: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis".Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2021Article
- Reply to GA Sforzo.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Health coaching has emerged as a potential supporting tool for health professionals to overcome behavioral barriers, but its efficacy in weight management remains unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to synthesize and evaluate the quality of evidence supporting the use of self-reported health coaching for weight loss. Seven electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane, Psyinfo, Virtual Health Library, and Scielo) were independently searched from inception to May 2020. This review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation recommendations. Any study that investigated a self-reported health coaching intervention with the goal of inducing weight loss in individuals of any age, health, or training status was considered for inclusion. Quantitative data were analyzed using multilevel hierarchical metaregression models conducted within a Bayesian framework. A total of 653 studies were screened and 38 were selected for inclusion. The quality of evidence supporting outcomes based on the entire evidence base was very low and studies were deemed to have high risk of bias. Meta-analysis of controlled studies provided evidence of an effect favoring coaching compared with usual care but was trivial in magnitude [effect size (ES)0.5: -0.09; 95% credible interval (CrI): -0.17, -0.02]. The multilevel extension of Egger's regression-intercept test indicated the existence of publication bias, whereas a sensitivity analysis based only on those studies deemed to be of high quality provided no evidence of an effect of coaching on weight loss (ES0.5: -0.04; 95% CrI: -0.12, 0.09). Considered collectively, the results of this investigation indicate that the available evidence is not of sufficient quality to support the use of self-reported health coaching as a health care intervention for weight loss. This trial was registered at Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) as CRD42020159023.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33339042What 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.