Trial reportContemporary clinical trials2025
Preference for behavior change strategies in randomized controlled trials: Evidence from weight management.
Trial report in Contemporary clinical trials, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05143931 (Evaluating Environmental Control), which is not on this 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.
Evaluating Environmental Control (AVOID) and Inhibitory Control (RESIST) Strategies to Improve Weight Management Outcomes
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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRandomized controlled trial participants are expected to embrace assignment to any of the study arms, yet individuals' relative preference for the study arms invariably affects who participates in trials and for how long.
methodsOur ongoing Avoid/Resist trial (1R01DK130851) tests two strategies to bridge the intention-behavior gap in a weight management intervention. Avoid combines pantry makeover and online grocery shopping. Resist involves gamified, inhibitory control training. During screening, individuals rate Avoid and Resist on affective valence (I don't like this - I like this) and instrumental utility (This will not benefit me - This will benefit me) using a 0-100 analogue scale. K-means clustering was used to identify clusters of individuals based on their liking and perceived benefits of the tested strategies before randomization.
resultsAmong respondents who completed the screener between January 2024 and January 2025 (n = 306; 64 % Female; 40 % Hispanic/Latino), the correlations between liking and perceived benefit ratings were high (>0.70). Median scores of liking and perceived benefits were 90 and 88 for Resist, and 91.5 and 90 for Avoid. K-means clustering revealed 3 groups: (1) highly favorable to Avoid and Resist (all ratings >90; 61 %); (2) relative preference for Resist (22 %); (3) relative preference for Avoid (17 %).
conclusionsEven among individuals willing to be randomized, nearly 40 % had a relative preference for one of the study arms. Additional work is needed to understand the role of relative preference on retention, adherence, and outcomes in weight management trials.
trial registrationThe study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05143931).
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.