Weight loss maintenance in women two to eleven years after participating in a commercial program: a survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: After 5 years, most reports show that less than 10% of people maintain a 5% loss from initial body weight. Weight maintenance after 10 years is rarely assessed, especially in commercial programs. The current article reports weight maintenance in individuals who had participated 2 to 11 years earlier in a popular commercial weight loss program based on Canada's Food Guide called Mincavi. METHODS: Randomly picked subjects answered a telephone questionnaire. Participants, 291 adult women from various regions of the province of Quebec, had followed the program 2 to 11 years earlier for at least a month. Body weight at the beginning and at the end of treatment was recorded as well as actual weight, age and height. Existing records allowed partial verification of the sample. RESULTS: Based on corrected weights, percentage of women who maintained at least 5% of their initial weight loss are as following; 2 years = 43.6% (n = 55), 3 years = 33.3% (n = 42), 4 years = 23.8% (n = 42), 5-6 years = 38.2% (n = 55), 7-8 years = 29.4% (n = 51), and 9-11 years; 19.6% (n = 46). Five to eleven years after they had participated in the program 29.1% of all women maintained a weight loss of at least 5%, while 14.3% maintained a loss of at least 10%. CONCLUSIONS: Even though success rate is not as high as could be wished for, results show that participation in the Mincavi program can lead to effective weight maintenance long after individuals have left it. These findings suggest more thorough studies should be conducted on this weight loss program.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".