Efficacy of a randomized trial examining commercial weight loss programs and exercise on metabolic syndrome in overweight and obese women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While commercial dietary weight-loss programs typically advise exercise, few provide actual programing. The goal of this study was to compare the Curves Complete 90-day Challenge (CC, n = 29), which incorporates exercising and diet, to programs advocating exercise (Weight Watchers Points Plus (WW, n = 29), Jenny Craig At Home (JC, n = 27), and Nutrisystem Advance Select (NS, n = 28)) or control (n = 20) on metabolic syndrome (MetS) and weight loss. We randomized 133 sedentary, overweight women (age, 47 ± 11 years; body mass, 86 ± 14 kg; body mass index, 35 ± 6 kg/m 2 ) into respective treatment groups for 12 weeks. Data were analyzed using chi square and general linear models adjusted for age and respective baseline measures. Data are means ± SD or mean change ± 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We observed a significant trend for a reduction in energy intake for all treatment groups and significant weight loss for all groups except control: CC (−4.32 kg; 95% CI, −5.75, −2.88), WW (−4.31 kg; 95% CI, −5.82, −2.96), JC (−5.34 kg; 95% CI, −6.86, −3.90), NS (−5.03 kg; 95% CI, −6.49, −3.56), and control (0.16 kg, 95% CI, −1.56, 1.89). Reduced MetS prevalence was observed at follow-up for CC (35% vs. 14%, adjusted standardized residuals (adjres.) = 3.1), but not WW (31% vs. 28% adjres. = 0.5), JC (37% vs. 42%, adjres. = −0.7), NS (39% vs. 50% adjres. = −1.5), or control (45% vs. 55% adjres. = −1.7). While all groups improved relative fitness (mL·kg −1 ·min −1 ) because of weight loss, only the CC group improved absolute fitness (L/min). In conclusion, commercial programs offering concurrent diet and exercise programming appear to offer greater improvements in MetS prevalence and cardiovascular function after 12 weeks of intervention.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".