Detailed Versus Simplified Dietary Self-monitoring in a Digital Weight Loss Intervention Among Racial and Ethnic Minority Adults: Fully Remote, Randomized Pilot Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Detailed self-monitoring (or tracking) of dietary intake is a popular and effective weight loss approach that can be delivered via digital tools, although engagement declines over time. Simplifying the experience of self-monitoring diet may counteract this decline in engagement. Testing these strategies among racial and ethnic minority groups is important as these groups are often disproportionately affected by obesity yet underrepresented in behavioral obesity treatment. OBJECTIVE: In this 2-arm pilot study, we aimed to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of a digital weight loss intervention with either detailed or simplified dietary self-monitoring. METHODS: and living in the United States. The Pacific time zone was selected for a fully remote study. Participants received a 3-month stand-alone digital weight loss intervention and were randomized 1:1 to either the detailed arm that was instructed to self-monitor all foods and drinks consumed each day using the Fitbit mobile app or to the simplified arm that was instructed to self-monitor only red zone foods (foods that are highly caloric and of limited nutritional value) each day via a web-based checklist. All participants were instructed to self-monitor both steps and body weight daily. Each week, participants were emailed behavioral lessons, action plans, and personalized feedback. In total, 12 a priori benchmarks were set to establish feasibility, including outcomes related to reach, retention, and self-monitoring engagement (assessed objectively via digital tools). Acceptability was assessed using a questionnaire. Weight change was assessed using scales shipped to the participants' homes and reported descriptively. RESULTS: . More than half (22/38, 58%) were identified as Hispanic of any race. The study retention rate was 92% (35/38) at 3 months. The detailed arm met 9 of 12 feasibility benchmarks, while the simplified arm met all 12. Self-monitoring engagement was moderate to high (self-monitoring diet: median of 49% of days for detailed, 97% for simplified; self-monitoring steps: 99% for detailed, 100% for simplified; self-monitoring weight: 67% for detailed, 80% for simplified). Participants in both arms reported high satisfaction, with 89% indicating that they would recommend the intervention. Weight change was -3.4 (95% CI -4.6 to -2.2) kg for detailed and -3.3 (95% CI -4.4 to -2.2) kg for simplified. CONCLUSIONS: A digital weight loss intervention that incorporated either detailed or simplified dietary self-monitoring was feasible, with high retention and engagement, and acceptable to racial and ethnic minority adults. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ASPREDICTED #66674; https://aspredicted.org/ka478.pdf.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,012 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».