Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41583783›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025

Creating a digital segmentation tool to tailor weight management advice: the Diet Types Survey.

E Brindal, G A Hendrie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

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

2 authors.

E BrindalCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Health & Biosecurity, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
G A HendrieCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Health & Biosecurity, Adelaide, SA, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Tailoring of weight management interventions has tended to focus on demographic characteristics, anthropometric data, health behavior, but seldom on psychological variations or personality traits. The objectives of this study were to (1) shorten and validate an existing dieting style tool; and (2) launch an online tool to assess the uptake and acceptability of segmented feedback. Method: This study used an existing dieting styles tool consisting of over 100 items about personality traits, self-efficacy, restraint, impulsivity, perfectionism, food involvement, motivation, mindfulness, habits, and habits related to eating and dieting behavior. The number of items was reduced, and a shorter survey was tested in a sample of 1,551 Australians (83.2% female). The revised version with a blurb based on different styles was beta tested ( Results: The structure of the short form survey replicated the original with both Eigenvalue criteria and Monte Carlo analysis, indicating the presence of 5 factors that would become the final types of Thinker, Craver, Socializer, Foodie, and Freewheeler. The correlation between factors ranged from 0.265 to 0.506. Internal consistency was acceptable to excellent. The launch of the final Diet Types tool resulted in 29,394 participants completing the survey in 5 days. The sample was mostly women (81.3%), with 42.9% aged 30-49 years and 36.0% aged 50-69 years. Three-quarters of the sample was categorized as overweight or obese (41.9% obese). One-third of the sample (33.8%, Conclusion: The development of a short segmentation tool with feedback about dieting personality proved to be popular, with high uptake particularly among older females living with obesity within the Australian population. In future, the information collected may help to create and deliver messages that are more relevant and persuasive than generic messages for weight management.

Indexed as

dietingeatingimplementationobesitysegmentation

Identifiers

PMID41583783
PMCPMC12827791

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.