Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34413247›Full record

Trial reportPediatrics2021

Weight Loss Interventions for Adolescents With Intellectual Disabilities: An RCT.

Lauren T Ptomey, Richard A Washburn, Jeannine R Goetz, Debra K Sullivan, Cheryl A Gibson, Matthew S Mayo, Ron Krebill, Anna M Gorczyca, Robert N Montgomery, Jeffery J Honas and 2 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Pediatrics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

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

Lauren T PtomeyDepartments of Internal Medicine lptomey@kumc.edu.
Richard A WashburnDepartments of Internal Medicine.
Jeannine R GoetzDietetics and Nutrition.
Debra K SullivanDietetics and Nutrition.
Cheryl A GibsonDepartments of Internal Medicine.
Matthew S MayoBiostatistics and Data Science, The University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas.
Ron KrebillBiostatistics and Data Science, The University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas.
Anna M GorczycaDepartments of Internal Medicine.
Robert N MontgomeryBiostatistics and Data Science, The University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, Kansas.
Jeffery J HonasDepartments of Internal Medicine.
Brian C HelselDepartments of Internal Medicine.
Joseph E DonnellyDepartments of Internal Medicine.
University of Kansas Medical Center · USAcademy of Nutrition and Dietetics · US

Funding

Weight Management for Adolescents with IDDR01HD079642 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS MEDICAL CENTER · PI DONNELLY, JOSEPH E. · 2015 to 2019
$2.8M
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD079642
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesIn this randomized trial, we compared the effectiveness of 2 diets (enhanced stop light diet [eSLD] versus conventional meal plan diet [CD]) and 2 delivery strategies (face-to-face [FTF] versus remote delivery [RD]) on weight loss across 6 months in adolescents with intellectual and developmental disabilities who were overweight or obese.

methodsParticipants were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 arms (FTF/CD, RD/CD, or RD/eSLD) and asked to attend one-on-one sessions with a health educator every 2 weeks to aid in maintaining compliance with recommendations for a reduced-energy diet and increased physical activity. The CD followed the US dietary guidelines. The eSLD used the stop light guide and was enhanced with portion-controlled meals. The FTF arm was delivered during in-person home visits. The RD arms were delivered by using video conferencing.

resultsA total of 110 adolescents with intellectual and developmental disabilities (aged ∼16 years, 53% female, BMI 33) were randomly assigned to the FTF/CD (

conclusionsThe eSLD elicited significantly greater 6-month weight loss compared with a CD when both interventions were delivered remotely. Minimal 6-month weight loss, which did not differ significantly between FTF delivery and RD, was observed with a CD.

Indexed as

Persons with Intellectual DisabilitiesAdolescentDevelopmental DisabilitiesFemaleHumansIntellectual DisabilityMaleObesityOverweightWeight LossWeight Reduction Programs

Identifiers

PMID34413247
PMCPMC8477713
OpenAlexW3195552149

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.