Long-Term Effect of Interactive Online Dietician Weight Loss Advice in General Practice (LIVA) Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Internet-based complex interventions aiming to promote weight loss and optimize healthy behaviors have attracted much attention. However, evidence for effect is lacking. Obesity is a growing problem, resulting in an increasing demand for cost efficient weight loss programs suitable for use on a large scale, for example, as part of standard primary care. In a previous pilot project by Brandt et al. (2011) without a control group, we examined the effects of online dietician counseling and found an average weight loss of 7.0 kg (95% CI: 4.6 to 9.3 kg) after 20 months. Aims and Methods. To analyze the effects of a complex intervention using trained dieticians in a general practice setting combined with internet-based interactive and personalized weight management support compared with conventional advice with a noninteractive internet support as placebo treatment in 340 overweight patients during a 2-year period. Primary endpoints are weight loss and lowering of cholesterol (LDL). We will also explore patients' sociodemographics and use of the intervention as well as the health professionals' views and perceptions of the intervention (their role and the advice and support that they provide). Perspective. The project will generate knowledge on the cost-effectiveness of a complex internet-based intervention in a general practice setting and on barriers and acceptability among professionals and patients.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".