MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3009224387 · doi:10.1161/circ.141.suppl_1.mp12

Abstract MP12: Lay- vs Professional-led Weight Loss Interventions for Overweight and Obese Youth: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

2020· review· en· W3009224387 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan McGavock, Sara Boissoneault, Nika Klaprat, Rasheda Rabbani, Ahmed M Abou-Setta

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOverweightWeight lossPsychological interventionRandomized controlled trialMeta-analysisCINAHLContext (archaeology)Body mass indexSystematic reviewCochrane LibraryMEDLINEObesityGerontologyPhysical therapyInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context: In this network meta analysis, we examine the short and long-term effects of professional and lay-led behavioural interventions for obese youth. Objective: The appropriate approach for weight loss among overweight and obese youth remains unclear. We evaluated the comparative effectiveness of behavioural pediatric weight loss interventions led by lay persons and professionals. Data Sources: MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and CINAHL between January 1996 and June 2019. Study Selection: Randomized controlled trials of behavioural lifestyle interventions that enrolled overweight and obese children and adolescents (5-18 years old) administered for at least 12 weeks. Data Extraction: A network meta-analyses using a Bayesian framework and Markov-chain Monte-Carlo simulation methods were used to combine direct and indirect evidence. The immediate and sustained change from baseline in weight (kg) and body mass index (BMI; kg/m2) were primary outcomes. Results: Of 34,384 citations retrieved, we included 78 RCTs (4,556 participants), delivered for 12 to 104 weeks. Compared to standard care, professional-led weight loss interventions were associated with a significant reduction in body weight [-1.6 kg, 95% credible interval (CrI) -2.3, -0.99, 64 trials] that was not sustained long-term [-1.02 kg, 95% CrI -2.2, +0.34, 21 trials]. There was no evidence of a meaningful weight loss for lay-led interventions in the short-term [-1.4 kg; 95% CrI -3.0, +0.26; 5 trials], or long-term [-0.98 kg, 95% CrI -3.6, +1.8, 1 trial] compared to standard care. Direct comparisons revealed expert and lay-led interventions yield similar effects (-0.25 kg, 95%CrI -1.9, +1.3, 5 trials). Conclusions: Professional-led weight loss interventions are the most effective for achieving and sustaining weight reduction among overweight and obese youth. There is a need for high quality trials of lay-led weight loss interventions for obese youth.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.082
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.082
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0220.035
Bibliometrics0.0120.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicObesity, Physical Activity, Diet→French-language works237,207→