Efficacy and safety of clinically managed weight loss programs: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Obesity has become a major driver in the burden of chronic diseases. The Canadian Clinical Practice Guidelines recommend a lifestyle intervention for the management and prevention of obesity. This includes behavior modification, dietary counseling, and physical activity. With the market overwhelmed with weight loss programs, the majority are focused on low-calorie diets and general recommendations for exercise. Most are not personalized and are not administered by healthcare professionals. An interdisciplinary team of highly trained healthcare professionals has the ability to provide medically sound and safe advice in all aspects of an individuals' life, such as lifestyle, sleep, mental health, and behaviors. A clinically managed weight loss program is defined as a team including a dietitian, exercise professional, psychologist, and/or physician or nurse practitioner oversight. With limiting results in the literature regarding clinically managed weight loss programs, it is difficult to conclude whether it may be effective. Therefore, the objective of this systematic review is to assess clinically managed weight loss programs, with a physician or nurse practitioner oversight in comparison with non-clinically managed weight loss programs with no physician oversight or nurse practitioner oversight in adults who are living with overweight or obesity. METHODS: A literature search will be executed by a knowledge synthesis librarian on MEDLINE, Cochrane Central, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL. The data collected will be extracted, stored, and managed in MS Excel 2016. The extraction of the data will include study details, study population details, health team details, intervention details, and outcome details. DISCUSSION: The prevalence of obesity has been increasing throughout the decades. The results from this systematic review may aid in recommending a more clinically safe weight loss program for those who struggle with overweight or obesity. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020170014.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Systematic review | high |
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 | 0.064 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.068 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".