Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39064800›Full record

ReviewNutrients2024

Is There an Ideal Diet? Some Insights from the POUNDS Lost Study.

George A Bray, Lu Qi, Frank M Sacks

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nutrients, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

3 authors.

George A BrayDepartment of Clinical Obesity, Pennington Biomedical Research Center, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70808, USA.
Lu QiDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Tulane University, New Orlean, LA 70112, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8041-7791
Frank M SacksDepartment of Nutrition, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1341-1995

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Diets for weight loss have a long history but an ideal one has not yet been clearly identified. To compare low-fat and lower carbohydrate diets, we designed The Preventing Overweight by Novel Dietary Strategies (POUNDS) Lost study. This is a 2 × 2 factorial study with diets of 20% or 40% fat and 15% or 25% protein with a graded carbohydrate intake of 35, 45, 55 and 65%. Weight loss, overall, was modest at nearly 6% with all four diets, and no significant dietary difference. The variability in weight loss in each diet group was significant, ranging from greater than 20% to a small weight gain. Studies of genetic variations in relation to weight loss showed that the diet that was selected could significantly affect weight loss, emphasizing that there is no ideal diet and more than one diet can be used to treat obesity. Weight loss was also influenced by the level of baseline triiodothyronine or thyroxine, and baseline carbohydrate and insulin resistance. Achieving a stable Health Eating Food Diversity Index, eating more protein, eating more fiber, engaging in more physical activity, sleeping better and eating less ultra-processed foods were beneficial strategies for weight loss in this trial. Although there is no "ideal diet", both the DASH diet and the Mediterranean diet have clinical trials showing their significant benefit for cardiovascular risk factors. Finally, the lesson of the "Last Chance Diet", which recommended a diet with protein from gelatin, proved that some diets could be hazardous.

Indexed as

Diet, Carbohydrate-RestrictedObesityWeight LossAdultDietary CarbohydratesDietary ProteinsDiet, Fat-RestrictedDiet, MediterraneanFemaleHumansInsulin ResistanceMaleMiddle AgedOverweightDietary CarbohydratesDietary Proteinsbehavioral and dietary factorsfastinggelatin dietshigh fathigh proteinlow carbohydratemetabolicvariability of weight lossweight loss

Identifiers

PMID39064800
PMCPMC11280300

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.