ArticleBMC public health2024
Association of weight loss strategies with all-cause and specific-cause mortality: a prospective cohort study.
Article in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe health effects of different weight loss strategies vary greatly, and the relationship between weight loss strategies, especially the combination of multiple strategies, and death is still unclear. We aimed to examine the associations of various numbers and combinations of weight loss strategies with all-cause and specific-cause mortality and to further evaluate the associations of different total weight loss volumes with mortality.
methodsUsing data from NHANES (1999-2018) with 48,430 participants aged 20 and above, we collected fourteen self-reported weight loss strategies and identified five clusters using latent class analysis. Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine the association between the amounts and clusters of weight loss strategies and mortality.
resultsDuring a median follow-up of 9.1 years of 48,430 participants, 7,539 deaths were recorded (including 1,941 CVDs and 1,714 cancer). Participants who adopted 2, 3-4, and ≥ 5 weight loss strategies had a lower risk of all-cause mortality, with HRs of 0.88 (95% CI, 0.81 to 0.97), 0.89 (95% CI, 0.81 to 0.96) and 0.71 (95% CI, 0.61 to 0.82). Regardless of weight loss or weight gain categories, there was a significant trend toward reduced mortality as the number of weight loss strategies increased (P trend < 0.05). Participants who adopted cluster-1 (four strategies), cluster-2 (five strategies) and cluster-3 (three strategies) had a significantly lower risk of all-cause mortality, with HRs of 0.71 (95% CI, 0.60 to 0.84), 0.70 (95% CI, 0.55 to 0.89) and 0.81 (95% CI, 0.70 to 0.94). Among them, cluster-1 and cluster-2 are both characterized by eating less food, exercising, drinking plenty of water, lowering calories and eating less fat. Conversely, cluster-4 (five strategies) and cluster-5 (four strategies) had marginally significant effects, and they both had actual higher total energy intakes. Similar associations were observed for CVDs and cancer mortality.
conclusionsEmploying two or more weight loss strategies was associated with a lower risk of death, even among those who gained weight. Eating less food, exercising, drinking plenty of water, lowering calories and eating less fat is a better combination of strategies. On this basis, limiting the actual intake of total energy is necessary.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.