Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41490780›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2026

A Real-Life Digital Intervention for Personalized Nutrition in Adults With Overweight or Obesity: Remote Randomized Controlled Trial.

Jelle Cbc de Jong, Femke Pm Hoevenaars, Lotte Gp Peters, Charlotte Mm Berendsen, Wilrike J Pasman, Martien Pm Caspers, Remon Dulos, Suzan Wopereis

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06547983 (Effectiviteit en Beleving Van FooDIYou), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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.

NCT06547983 nacompletednot on this map

Effectiviteit en Beleving Van FooDIYou

TypeinterventionalSponsorTNORan2023 to 2023Enrolled180ConditionsObesityArmsPersonalized nutritional advice, Personalized nutritional advice and food boxes
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Jelle Cbc de Jong *Department of Microbiology and Systems Biology, Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5154-4900
Femke Pm Hoevenaars *Department of Microbiology and Systems Biology, Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1207-925X
Lotte Gp PetersDepartment of Microbiology and Systems Biology, Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-9637-3284
Charlotte Mm BerendsenDepartment of Microbiology and Systems Biology, Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-1610-3461
Wilrike J PasmanDepartment of Microbiology and Systems Biology, Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6962-2674
Martien Pm CaspersDepartment of Microbiology and Systems Biology, Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0248-4008
Remon DulosDepartment of Microbiology and Systems Biology, Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-4086-2200
Suzan WopereisDepartment of Microbiology and Systems Biology, Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9612-657X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA digital-first strategy is increasingly implemented to reduce participant burden, accelerate recruitment, collect real-world data, and increase the diversity of the study population. However, fully remote studies lack face-to-face interaction, which may affect motivation, particularly in the delivery of personalized nutritional advice. Additionally, self-reported data may vary in terms of standardization and completeness.

objectiveThe study's primary objective is to evaluate the feasibility of conducting a fully remote, fully digital randomized controlled nutritional intervention, including participant experience and the capability to perform do-it-yourself anthropometric measurements at home. Secondary objectives are to determine whether self-collected data could detect changes in body weight and other anthropometric outcomes, and to compare the effectiveness of generic versus personalized nutrition advice, with and without personalized food boxes.

methodsWe conducted a fully online, 3-arm randomized controlled trial including adults with overweight or obesity who were motivated to lose weight. Participants were assigned to a control group that received generic advice (n=43), a personalized intervention group that received personalized advice only (n=40), or a personalized intervention plus group that received personalized advice plus personalized food boxes (n=39). The 6-week intervention was delivered entirely digitally, and all anthropometric measurements, questionnaires, and dietary data were self-collected at home. Feasibility was assessed using adherence metrics, completion of self-measurements, and a user-experience questionnaire. Secondary analyses evaluated weight loss, changes in anthropometry, and exploratory associations, including sex differences.

resultsFeasibility was high-102 out of 122 (83.6%) participants found the self-measured anthropometric assessments easy to perform, and 112 (91.8%) participants reported that completing questionnaires from home was easy. For secondary outcomes, participants receiving personalized, but not generic, nutritional advice significantly lost body weight (-1.0 kg; P=.002). Participants receiving personalized food boxes in addition to personalized nutritional advice lost significantly more body weight than the other 2 groups (-2.5 kg; P=.001) and also showed a decrease in hip circumference (-2.9 cm; P=.01). Personalized advice was not easier or more enjoyable to implement than generic nutritional advice, whereas the addition of personalized food boxes improved the ease of implementing personalized nutritional advice (P<.001). All participants, irrespective of the intervention arm, reduced intake of unhealthy food groups, including ready-made meals (113.6 g vs 78.5 g, -30.9%); sauces and gravy (18.8 g vs 10.0 g, -46.8%); sweet snacks (84.8 g vs 64.1 g, -24.4%); savory snacks (50.5 g vs 40.0 g, -20.1%); bread, pasta, rice, and wraps (nutritional quality score of 1.9 vs 1.7, -10.5%); and vegetables (129.0 g vs 118.7 g, -8.0%); and replaced coffee with tea.

conclusionsThis study demonstrates that fully remote, participant-led nutritional intervention studies are feasible, with participants able to independently perform anthropometric measurements and self-report data of sufficient quality to detect meaningful effects. Personalized nutritional advice resulted in greater weight loss than generic advice, and the addition of personalized food boxes further enhanced the beneficial anthropometric effects of the intervention. We conclude that such nutritional intervention studies can be conducted fully online, resulting in measurable anthropometric effects after 6 weeks.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT06547983; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT06547983.

Indexed as

ObesityOverweightAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrecision MedicineWeight Lossbehaviordietary advicedigitaldigital firstDIYdo it yourselffeedbackpersonalized nutritionreal-world studyremote

Identifiers

PMID41490780
PMCPMC12817035

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.