↓ Skip to main content

Oxford University Press

Article Metrics

Evaluation of meal replacements and a home food environment intervention for long-term weight loss: a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
13 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
14 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
127 Mendeley
Title
Evaluation of meal replacements and a home food environment intervention for long-term weight loss: a randomized controlled trial
Published in
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, January 2018
DOI 10.1093/ajcn/nqx005
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael R Lowe, Meghan L Butryn, Fengqing Zhang

Abstract

Lifestyle change treatments for weight loss produce medically meaningful weight reductions, but lost weight is usually regained. Meal replacements (MRs) represent one avenue for improving long-term weight loss. Another, nutrition-focused approach involves having participants make specific changes in the energy density, composition, and structure of the foods in their personal food environments. Three conditions were compared: behavior therapy (BT), BT plus MRs (BT+MR), and a nutrition-focused treatment aimed at modifying the home food environment (HFE). Overweight and obese individuals (n = 262) were randomly assigned to 1 of the 3 conditions. Treatment occurred in weekly groups for 6 mo and in biweekly groups for 6 mo. Assessments were conducted at baseline and at 6, 12, 18, 24, and 36 mo. Multilevel models were used to estimate weight-change trajectories for each participant and to examine the treatment group effect on long-term weight loss. A multilevel analysis indicated that all 3 groups showed significant weight loss over 12 mo that was gradually regained to the 36-mo follow-up. Mean ± SD percentages of baseline weight loss at 12 mo for BT, BT+MR, and HFE were 9.41% ± 7.92%, 10.37% ± 7.77%, and 10.97% ± 7.79%, respectively. Comparable percentages at 36 mo were 4.21% ± 8.64%, 3.06% ± 6.93%, and 4.49% ± 7.83%. Those in the HFE condition lost more weight than those receiving BT through the 36-mo assessment (P < 0.01), as reflected in 2 treatment × time interactions. Further analyses showed that HFE produced the largest increases in cognitive restraint and that this increase largely mediated the HFE group's improved weight loss. The nutrition-focused intervention studied here produced modestly greater long-term weight loss than BT, an effect that was largely explainable by an unexpected boost in cognitive restraint in this condition. This study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01065974.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 127 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 17%
Student > Bachelor 20 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 9%
Unspecified 8 6%
Other 5 4%
Other 25 20%
Unknown 36 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 29 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 12%
Unspecified 8 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 6%
Psychology 7 6%
Other 22 17%
Unknown 39 31%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 114. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 June 2022.
All research outputs
#304,810
of 22,668,244 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
#768
of 12,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,173
of 438,753 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
#5
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,668,244 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,187 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 438,753 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.