ArticleInternational journal of obesity (2005)2025
Assessing the value for money, from a policy maker perspective, of 24 randomised controlled trial designs for an online weight maintenance guided self-help intervention: an expected value of sample information analysis.
Article in International journal of obesity (2005), 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo analyse whether conducting a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate an online weight maintenance guided self-help intervention (Supporting Weight Management (SWiM)) would offer good value for money in the United Kingdom.
methodWe examined 24 RCT designs by varying inclusion criteria (participants completing behavioural weight management, specialist-led weight management, diabetes prevention programme, type 2 diabetes remission, digital weight management, all weight management services), trial duration (1-2 years), and sample size (n = 500 or 2000). Trial benefits were estimated by the method of expected value of sample information analysis using a health economic model. The model examines how the proposed intervention affects weight maintenance over time (with uncertainty), and generates estimated lifetime Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) and National Health Service (NHS) costs. Structured expert elicitation with 4 experts was undertaken to quantify pre-trial uncertainty in the effectiveness of SWiM compared with usual care. All trial designs were simulated to estimate trial benefits: the reduction in the costs of an inefficient decision for future populations over 10 years. Trial designs offer value for money if trial benefits exceed trial costs.
resultsFor three inclusion criteria options (groups recently completing 'diabetes remission', 'digital weight management' or 'specialist weight management'), the cost of the proposed trials was estimated to exceed the estimated trial benefit (value of the reduction in decision uncertainty) over 10 years. For the other three inclusion criteria options (groups recently completed 'behavioural weight management', 'diabetes prevention programme', or 'all weight loss programmes'), 12 trial designs produced greater benefits than costs. The optimal trial design option would include 'all weight loss programmes', with 2 years follow-up and sample size n = 2000.
conclusionInvestment in a large RCT to evaluate the SWiM intervention for patients completing a range of weight loss interventions offers the greatest value to the NHS.
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.