MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2940189362 · doi:10.1186/s12889-019-6621-8

Study protocol of a pragmatic randomized controlled trial incorporated into the Group Lifestyle Balance™ program: the nutrigenomics, overweight/obesity and weight management trial (the NOW trial)

2019· article· en· W2940189362 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Justine Horne, Jason Gilliland, Colleen O’Connor, Jamie A. Seabrook, Peter Hannaberg, Janet Madill

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Public Health · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicNutrition, Genetics, and Disease
Canadian institutionsChildren’s Health Research InstituteLawson Health Research InstituteWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchStrongBrescia University College
KeywordsMedicineOverweightRandomized controlled trialWeight managementPopulationChecklistWeight lossPhysical therapyBody mass indexObesityBiostatisticsFamily medicineGerontologyPublic healthNursingEnvironmental healthSurgeryInternal medicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The nutrigenomics, overweight/obesity and weight management trial (NOW Trial) is a pragmatic randomized controlled trial of community-dwelling adults recruited from the Group Lifestyle Balance™ (GLB™) Program. The GLB™ Program (formerly referred to as the Diabetes Prevention Program) is an evidence-based, intensive weight management program, which was offered to overweight/obese patients (BMI ≥ 25.0 kg/m2) in a rural Ontario community. Patients enrolled in the GLB™ Program were invited to participate in this study. GLB™ groups were randomized 1:1 to receive either the standard GLB™ program + population-based lifestyle advice for weight management, or a modified GLB™ program + personalized, genetic-based lifestyle advice for weight management. The purpose of this study is to determine if the provision of genetic-based lifestyle guidelines is superior to the provision of population-based guidelines in a pragmatic clinical setting to promote changes in: body composition, weight, body mass index, dietary and physical activity habits, as well as attitudes, subjective norms, and behavioural control. The 12-month intervention protocol consists of 23 group-based sessions and 4 one-on-one sessions. Data collection time points include baseline in addition to 3, 6, and 12-month follow up. The comprehensive study design is described in the present manuscript, using both the extended CONSORT checklist for reporting pragmatic trials and the SPIRIT checklist as guidance during manuscript development. Overall, this study seeks to pragmatically determine if the provision of DNA-based lifestyle advice leads to improved health and lifestyle outcomes compared to the provision of standard, population-based lifestyle advice. The results of this trial can be used to inform clinical and community nutrition practice guidelines. This study was registered with clinicaltrials.gov : NCT03015012 on January 9, 2017.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.076
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.096
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.401

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0760.096
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.007
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0120.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0950.020

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Public HealthSame topicNutrition, Genetics, and DiseaseFrench-language works237,207