Trial reportInternational journal of obesity (2005)2026
A randomised controlled trial of a lived experience and education-based weight bias intervention for Australian healthcare students.
Trial report in International journal of obesity (2005), 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA three-arm parallel randomised controlled trial was conducted to examine the efficacy of two brief videos for reducing healthcare students' explicit weight bias and to identify the key messages retained from the videos.
methodsOne hundred and three university students from 15 healthcare disciplines at 14 Australian universities viewed one of three randomly assigned brief videos: (1) empathy-focused (Experience), (2) education-focused (Science), or (3) smoking-focused (Control). Participants completed explicit weight bias measures at baseline, immediate post-intervention, and 2-week follow-up. Generalised linear mixed models (complete case and per-protocol) assessed intervention efficacy. Content analysis was used to examine participants' three main take-home messages from the videos.
resultsPer-protocol analysis showed improved clinical confidence in the Experience (vs. Control) Group (g = 0.79, p = 0.027) immediately post-intervention. Complete case analysis found immediate post-intervention improvements in the Science group for empathy (vs. Control, g = 0.74, p = 0.002; vs. Experience, g = 0.51, p = 0.039) and understanding of socioeconomic contributors to obesity (vs. Experience, g = 0.68, p = 0.005). Only the improved empathy for patients living with obesity in the Science (vs. Control, g = 0.49, p = 0.041) Group was sustained at follow-up. There were no significant differences immediately post-intervention or follow-up for the remaining outcomes. Content analysis revealed that students recognised the complexity of overweight and obesity, the existence and negative impact of weight bias within society and healthcare settings, and the need to use improved methods to reduce weight bias.
conclusionThe two brief weight bias videos had limited efficacy in reducing Australian healthcare students' explicit weight bias on most outcome measures, but improved students' empathy for patients and understanding of the socioeconomic contributors to obesity. Considerable reductions in explicit weight bias may require integrating weight bias reduction strategies into university curricula, with repeated exposure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41764326What 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.