Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33794781›Full record

Trial reportBMC family practice2021

Using a brief web-based 5A intervention to improve weight management in primary care: results of a cluster-randomized controlled trial.

Franziska D Welzel, Jonathan Bär, Janine Stein, Margrit Löbner, Alexander Pabst, Melanie Luppa, Thomas Grochtdreis, Anette Kersting, Matthias Blüher, Claudia Luck-Sikorski and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC family practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. 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

12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Franziska D WelzelInstitute of Social Medicine, Occupational Health and Public Health (ISAP), Medical Faculty, University of Leipzig, Philipp-Rosenthal-Straße 55, 04103, Leipzig, Germany. Franziska.Welzel@medizin.uni-leipzig.de.
Jonathan BärInstitute of Social Medicine, Occupational Health and Public Health (ISAP), Medical Faculty, University of Leipzig, Philipp-Rosenthal-Straße 55, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.
Janine SteinInstitute of Social Medicine, Occupational Health and Public Health (ISAP), Medical Faculty, University of Leipzig, Philipp-Rosenthal-Straße 55, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.
Margrit LöbnerInstitute of Social Medicine, Occupational Health and Public Health (ISAP), Medical Faculty, University of Leipzig, Philipp-Rosenthal-Straße 55, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.
Alexander PabstInstitute of Social Medicine, Occupational Health and Public Health (ISAP), Medical Faculty, University of Leipzig, Philipp-Rosenthal-Straße 55, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.
Melanie LuppaInstitute of Social Medicine, Occupational Health and Public Health (ISAP), Medical Faculty, University of Leipzig, Philipp-Rosenthal-Straße 55, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.
Thomas GrochtdreisDepartment of Health Economics and Health Services Research, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Anette KerstingIntegrated Research and Treatment Centre (IFB) AdiposityDiseases, Leipzig University Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany.
Matthias BlüherIntegrated Research and Treatment Centre (IFB) AdiposityDiseases, Leipzig University Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany.
Claudia Luck-SikorskiInstitute of Social Medicine, Occupational Health and Public Health (ISAP), Medical Faculty, University of Leipzig, Philipp-Rosenthal-Straße 55, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.
Hans-Helmut KönigDepartment of Health Economics and Health Services Research, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Steffi G Riedel-HellerInstitute of Social Medicine, Occupational Health and Public Health (ISAP), Medical Faculty, University of Leipzig, Philipp-Rosenthal-Straße 55, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.
Leipzig University · DEUniversität Hamburg · DE

Funding

Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung 01EO1501
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe primary health care setting is considered a major starting point in successful obesity management. However, research indicates insufficient quality of weight counseling in primary care. Aim of the present study was to implement and evaluate a 5A online tutorial aimed at improving weight management and provider-patient-interaction in primary health care. The online tutorial is a stand-alone low-threshold minimal e-health intervention for general practitioners based on the 5As guidance for obesity management by the Canadian Obesity Network.

methodsIn a cluster-randomized controlled trial, 50 primary care practices included 160 patients aged 18 to 60 years with obesity (BMI ≥ 30). The intervention practices had continuous access to the 5A online tutorial for the general practitioner. Patients of control practices were treated as usual. Primary outcome was the patients' perspective of the doctor-patient-interaction regarding obesity management, assessed with the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care before and after (6/12 months) the training. Treatment effects over time (intention-to-treat) were evaluated using mixed-effects linear regression models.

resultsMore than half of the physicians (57%) wished for more training offers on obesity counseling. The 5A online tutorial was completed by 76% of the physicians in the intervention practices. Results of the mixed-effects regression analysis showed no treatment effect at 6 months and 12 months' follow-up for the PACIC 5A sum score. Patients with obesity in the intervention group scored lower on self-stigma and readiness for weight management compared to participants in the control group at 6 months' follow-up. However, there were no significant group differences for weight, quality of life, readiness to engage in weight management, self-stigma and depression at 12 months' follow-up.

conclusionTo our knowledge, the present study provides the first long-term results for a 5A-based intervention in the context of the German primary care setting. The results suggest that a stand-alone low-threshold minimal e-health intervention for general practitioners does not improve weight management in the long term. To improve weight management in primary care, more comprehensive strategies are needed. However, due to recruitment difficulties the final sample was smaller than intended. This may have contributed to the null results.

trial registrationThe study has been registered at the German Clinical Trials Register (Identifier: DRKS00009241 , Registered 3 February 2016).

Indexed as

Internet-Based InterventionObesity ManagementCanadaHumansPrimary Health CareQuality of Life5As counselingCRCTObesityPrimary careProvider-patient-interaction

Identifiers

PMID33794781
PMCPMC8017625
OpenAlexW3141691684

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.