Trial reportAnnals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine2026
Can targeted recruitment methods affect male participation in weight loss interventions and trials?
Trial report in Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBehavioral weight loss studies often enroll more females than males despite similar obesity prevalence. There is a paucity of experimental evidence on recruitment strategies to attract male participants in behavioral trials broadly and in weight management trials, specifically.
methodsWe examined 4 theory and evidence-based advertising messages and 4 recruitment modalities (mailing, emailing, Facebook, and Spotify) in three iterative waves during a decentralized longitudinal randomized controlled trial comparing 2 behavioral weight loss interventions.
resultsThe number of ad clicks and web screens completed did not appear to differ among the messages. Facebook was the most cost-effective overall ($32.86 per recruited person) with the highest proportion of male interest when the message was tailored and campaigns were set to target males (79%), but mailing produced the higher total rate of potential participants screened and garnered a higher proportion of male interest overall (23% average across all waves), albeit it at greater cost.
conclusionsSocial media is a cost-efficient recruitment avenue, although it may reduce the ability to assemble a representative sample. Future studies should formally experiment with recruitment to inform robust recommendations.
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.