MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4221110926 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.211041

A small change approach to prevent long-term weight gain in adults with overweight and obesity: a randomized controlled trial

2022· article· en· W4221110926 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Robert Ross, Amy E. Latimer‐Cheung, Andrew G. Day, Andrea M. Brennan, James O. Hill

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPhysical Activity and Health
Canadian institutionsKingston Health Sciences CentreQueen's University
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsOverweightCardiorespiratory fitnessObesityMedicineWeight lossRandomized controlled trialWeight changeWaistConfidence intervalWeight gainBody mass indexPhysical therapyDemographyGerontologyInternal medicineBody weight

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Efforts to manage obesity through weight loss are often unsuccessful as most adults are not able to sustain the major changes in behaviour that are required to maintain weight loss long term. We sought to determine whether small changes in physical activity and diet prevent weight gain in adults with overweight and obesity. Methods: We randomized 320 sedentary adults with overweight or obesity to monitoring alone (MA, n = 160) or a small change approach (SCA, n = 160). In Phase I (2 yr), MA participants were asked to maintain their normal lifestyle and SCA participants were counselled to make small changes in diet and physical activity, namely a suggested increase in daily step count of 2000 steps with a decrease in energy intake of 100 kcal per day, with group and individual support. Phase II (1 yr) was a passive follow-up period. The difference in change in body weight between groups at 24 and 36 months from baseline was the primary outcome. Additional outcomes included waist circumference and cardiorespiratory fitness. Results: Overall, 268 participants (83.8%) completed the 2-year intervention, and 239 (74.7%) returned at the end of the follow-up period at 3 years. The difference in body weight change between the SCA and MA groups was significant at 3, 6, 12 and 15 months from baseline, but was no longer significant at 24 months (mean change 0.9 [standard error (SE) 0.5] kg v. −0.4 [SE 0.5] kg; difference −0.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] −1.9 to 0.8) or at 36 months (−1.2 [SE 0.8] v. −0.7 [SE 0.8] kg; difference −0.5, 95% CI −2.2 to 1.2). Changes in waist circumference and cardiorespiratory fitness were not significantly different between groups at 24 or 36 months (both p > 0.1). Interpretation: The SCA did not prevent weight gain compared with monitoring alone at 2 or 3 years in adults with overweight or obesity. On average, we observed prevention of weight gain in both arms of the trial. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT02027077.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association Journal→Same topicPhysical Activity and Health→French-language works237,207→