Gender differences in adherence and retention in Mediterranean diet interventions with a weight‐loss outcome: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Mediterranean diet has been shown to be effective in improving health outcomes and for weight loss. Adherence and retention in dietary interventions are critical to ensure the benefits of the exposure. No studies to date have assessed the role of gender in understanding participants who remain engaged and adhere to Mediterranean diet interventions. AIMS: This study aimed to explore gender differences in recruitment, adherence, and retention for Mediterranean diet interventions and whether these were associated with differences in weight-loss outcomes. METHODS: A systematic search was completed in EMBASE, Medline, Cochrane, and clinicaltrials.gov from inception to March 2023. A meta-analysis of studies reporting retention by gender was completed using odds ratios comparing female to male dropout numbers. A second meta-analysis was completed for adherence comparing standardized mean difference of Mediterranean diet scores stratified by gender. Newcastle Ottawa score was used to assess risk of bias. RESULTS: A total of 70 articles were included in the systematic review with six articles included in the adherence meta-analysis and nine in the dropout meta-analysis. No statistically significant difference was shown for adherence or retention by gender. Weight-loss outcomes were inconsistent. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the study suggest a higher adherence and lower dropout for women although these results were not statistically significant. Future studies of Mediterranean diet interventions should include adherence, retention, and weight-loss data stratified by gender to allow further investigation of this relationship.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".