Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37354334›Full record

ReviewCurrent obesity reports2023

The Effectiveness of eHealth Interventions for Weight Loss and Weight Loss Maintenance in Adults with Overweight or Obesity: A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews.

Sakris K E Kupila, Anu Joki, Laura-U Suojanen, Kirsi H Pietiläinen

Erratum issuedOpen access · hybridAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current obesity reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 65 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
65citing papers in PubMed, 13 pooled it
30.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

65 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 69 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Dietary E-Health Interventions for Adults With Severe Mental Illness: A Systematic Review.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2025
    Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

5 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sakris K E KupilaObesity Research Unit, Research Program for Clinical and Molecular Metabolism, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland. sakris.kupila@helsinki.fi.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8668-7258
Anu JokiHealthyWeightHub, Endocrinology, Abdominal Center, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7814-2186
Laura-U SuojanenHealthyWeightHub, Endocrinology, Abdominal Center, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0771-8026
Kirsi H PietiläinenObesity Research Unit, Research Program for Clinical and Molecular Metabolism, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8522-1288
University of Helsinki · FI

Funding

Academy of Finland 266286Academy of Finland 272376Academy of Finland 314383Academy of Finland 335443Novo Nordisk Fonden NNF10OC1013354Novo Nordisk Fonden NNF17OC0027232Novo Nordisk Fonden NNF20OC0060547Suomen Lääketieteen Säätiö 5891
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of eHealth interventions for weight loss and weight loss maintenance among adults with overweight or obesity through a systematic review of systematic reviews. RECENT

findingsThis study included 26 systematic reviews, covering a total of 338 original studies, published between 2018 and 2023. The review indicates that eHealth interventions are more effective than control interventions or no care and comparable to face-to-face interventions. The effect sizes remain relatively small when comparing eHealth interventions to any control conditions, with mean differences of weight loss results from - 0.12 kg (95% CI - 0.64 to 0.41 kg) in a review comparing eHealth interventions to face-to-face care to - 4.32 kg (- 5.08 kg to - 3.57 kg) in a review comparing eHealth interventions to no care. The methodological quality of the included studies varies considerably. However, it can be concluded that interventions with human contact work better than those that are fully automated. In conclusion, this systematic review of systematic reviews provides an updated understanding of the development of digital interventions in recent years and their effectiveness for weight loss and weight loss maintenance among adults with overweight or obesity. The findings suggest that eHealth interventions can be a valuable tool for delivering obesity care to more patients economically. Further research is needed to determine which specific types of eHealth interventions are most effective and how to best integrate them into clinical practice.

Indexed as

OverweightTelemedicineAdultHumansObesitySystematic Reviews as TopicWeight LossDigital healtheHealthObesityTelemedicineWeight lossWeight loss maintenance

Identifiers

PMID37354334
PMCPMC10482795
OpenAlexW4381855724

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.