ArticleClinical nutrition ESPEN2025
A pilot study on traditional vs. digital self-administered questionnaire completion in the International Weight Control Registry.
Article in Clinical nutrition ESPEN, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND &
aimScarce reports on the characteristics of individuals choosing to enroll in obesity-related registries via digital or traditional methods exist. We examined whether characteristics of participants who enrolled in the International Weight Control Registry (IWCR) via digital surveys differed from those who enrolled with paper surveys.
methodsThis manuscript describes the pilot phase of IWCR recruitment of eligible participants from one collaborating country. The IWCR includes questionnaires capturing biological, behavioral, environmental and psychosocial domains of weight management. All adult individuals with an intentional weight loss history, regardless of it being successful or not, are eligible to participate. Two invitations for participation were sent out. Firstly, potential participants were invited to complete the survey digitally; then, in the second invitation, potential volunteers were invited to complete the survey on paper.
resultsA total of 69 persons with weight loss experiences completed this pilot survey (40 on-paper, 29 digitally). No differences were detected in the sex distribution and the level of education between groups (all p > 0.05). Fewer participants in the on-paper group reported to have experienced significant weight loss in their adult life (70.0 vs 100 %, p = 0.001). Maximum Body Mass Index (BMI) and initial weight loss (%) were similar in both groups, however the digital group reported significantly greater weight loss maintenance (86.5 vs 43.8 % of the initial weight loss, p = 0.008). More persons in the digital group reported to have achieved their current weight by linear weight loss (rapid or not) vs. through a series of weight loss cycles (p = 0.008).
conclusionThe different modes of engagement (digital vs. paper) may target different people. Traditional means of questionnaire completion were more appealing in individuals with less successful weight loss efforts. These preliminary results suggest that offering both online and paper versions of registry questionnaires may support data collection in a broader population demographic.
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.