Cited by 709Diet and metabolism studiesNutrition, Genetics, and DiseaseDietary Effects on Health

Effect of Low-Fat vs Low-Carbohydrate Diet on 12-Month Weight Loss in Overweight Adults and the Association With Genotype Pattern or Insulin Secretion: The DIETFITS Randomized Clinical Trial

Open access
Gardner, Christopher D., Trepanowski, John F., Del Gobbo, Liana C., Hauser, Michelle E., Rigdon, Joseph, Ioannidis, John P. A., Desai, Manisha, King, Abby C.·2018·JAMA

Abstract

Importance: Dietary modification remains key to successful weight loss. Yet, no one dietary strategy is consistently superior to others for the general population. Previous research suggests genotype or insulin-glucose dynamics may modify the effects of diets. Objective: To determine the effect of a healthy low-fat (HLF) diet vs a healthy low-carbohydrate (HLC) diet on weight change and if genotype pattern or insulin secretion are related to the dietary effects on weight loss. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Diet Intervention Examining The Factors Interacting with Treatment Success (DIETFITS) randomized clinical trial included 609 adults aged 18 to 50 years without diabetes with a body mass index between 28 and 40. The trial enrollment was from January 29, 2013, through April 14, 2015; the date of final follow-up was May 16, 2016. Participants were randomized to the 12-month HLF or HLC diet. The study also tested whether 3 single-nucleotide polymorphism multilocus genotype responsiveness patterns or insulin secretion (INS-30; blood concentration of insulin 30 minutes after a glucose challenge) were associated with weight loss. Interventions: Health educators delivered the behavior modification intervention to HLF (n = 305) and HLC (n = 304) participants via 22 diet-specific small group sessions administered over 12 months. The sessions focused on ways to achieve the lowest fat or carbohydrate intake that could be maintained long-term and emphasized diet quality. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was 12-month weight change and determination of whether there were significant interactions among diet type and genotype pattern, diet and insulin secretion, and diet and weight loss. Results: Among 609 participants randomized (mean age, 40 [SD, 7] years; 57% women; mean body mass index, 33 [SD, 3]; 244 [40%] had a low-fat genotype; 180 [30%] had a low-carbohydrate genotype; mean baseline INS-30, 93 μIU/mL), 481 (79%) completed the trial. In the HLF vs HLC diets, respectively, the mean 12-month macronutrient distributions were 48% vs 30% for carbohydrates, 29% vs 45% for fat, and 21% vs 23% for protein. Weight change at 12 months was -5.3 kg for the HLF diet vs -6.0 kg for the HLC diet (mean between-group difference, 0.7 kg [95% CI, -0.2 to 1.6 kg]). There was no significant diet-genotype pattern interaction (P = .20) or diet-insulin secretion (INS-30) interaction (P = .47) with 12-month weight loss. There were 18 adverse events or serious adverse events that were evenly distributed across the 2 diet groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this 12-month weight loss diet study, there was no significant difference in weight change between a healthy low-fat diet vs a healthy low-carbohydrate diet, and neither genotype pattern nor baseline insulin secretion was associated with the dietary effects on weight loss. In the context of these 2 common weight loss diet approaches, neither of the 2 hypothesized predisposing factors was helpful in identifying which diet was better for whom. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01826591.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2018.0245

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Low-calorie diets typically restrict fats or carbohydrates, and neither is more important for weight loss if only a calorie deficit occurs.

    “Low-calorie diets typically restrict fats or carbohydrates, neither of which has been determined to be more important for weight loss if only a calorie deficit occurs.”

    From Optimal Diet Strategies for Weight Loss and Weight Loss Maintenance (2021) · cites this paper as [16]

    The Conclusions report no significant difference in 12-month weight change between the healthy low-fat and healthy low-carbohydrate diets. The Results report similar reductions in energy intake in both groups, but the Weight Loss Intervention section says participants received no explicit calorie-restriction instructions. The study therefore supports the comparison between diets, not the broader claim that neither matters more whenever a calorie deficit occurs. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Adherence to behavioral therapy sessions is a greater predictor for better outcomes than macronutrient breakdown.

    “with adherence to behavioral therapy sessions being a greater predictor for better outcomes than macronutrient breakdown”

    From Lifestyle Medicine for Obesity in the Era of Highly Effective Anti-Obesity Treatment (2025) · cites this paper as [182]

    The Results report similar attendance in the two diet groups, and the Discussion reports no meaningful difference in weight loss between the low-fat and low-carbohydrate groups (page not available in our copy). The paper does not report that session attendance predicts weight loss, or compare its predictive value with macronutrient breakdown; that is the unsupported part of the claim. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Calorically restricted low-carbohydrate diets are effective for weight loss.

    “Calorically restricted low-carbohydrate diets have been shown to be effective for weight loss”

    From Lifestyle Medicine for Obesity in the Era of Highly Effective Anti-Obesity Treatment (2025) · cites this paper as [182]

    The Primary Outcome section reports a mean 12-month weight loss of 6.0 kg in the healthy low-carbohydrate group. The Results report that participants reduced their energy intake by approximately 500–600 kcal/day, but the Weight Loss Intervention section explicitly says they were not instructed to restrict calories. The study therefore supports weight loss with a low-carbohydrate diet, but not the characterization of its intervention as prescribed caloric restriction. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The DIETFITS study found no significant differences in weight loss between low-fat and low-carbohydrate diets.

    “The 2018 the Diet Intervention Examining The Factors Interacting with Treatment Success (DIETFITS) study found no significant differences in weight loss between low-fat and low-carbohydrate diets.”
  • No particular macronutrient breakdown has been shown to be generally superior for weight loss.

    “no particular macronutrient breakdown has been shown to be generally superior for weight loss”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [9]9. Dopler Nelson M, Prabakar P, Kondragunta V, Kornman KS, Gardner CD. Genetic phenotypes predict weight loss success: the right diet does matter. Paper presented at: joint conference of the 50th Cardiovascular Disease Epidemiology and Prevention and Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism; March 2-3, 2010; San Francisco, CA.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gardner, C. D., Trepanowski, J. F., Del Gobbo, L. C., Hauser, M. E., Rigdon, J., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Desai, M., & King, A. C.
Affiliations
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
  • Stanford Prevention Research Center, Department of Medicine, Stanford University Medical School, Stanford, California
Corresponding author
Gardner, Christopher D.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2018-02-20
Volume
319
Issue
7
Pages
667
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2790416311
Cited by
709
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 52 · 2025: 66 · 2024: 70 · 2023: 62 · 2022: 91 · 2021: 85 · 2020: 138 · 2019: 84 · 2018: 59
FWCI
62.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JAMA (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5k12gm088033-05)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (T32HL007034)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (K12-GM088033)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (R01DK091831, P30DK116074)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Diet and metabolism studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Nutrition, Genetics, and Disease
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Dietary Effects on Health
Keywords
low-fat diet, low-carbohydrate diet, weight loss, overweight adults, single nucleotide polymorphisms, insulin secretion, macronutrient distribution, personalized nutrition, behaviour change interventions, fasting blood glucose, HOMA-IR
MeSH terms
Adult, Energy Intake, Diet, Reducing, Female, Genotype, Humans, Insulin, Insulin Resistance, Male, Middle Aged, Obesity, Weight Loss, Diet, Fat-Restricted, Overweight, Diet, Carbohydrate-Restricted, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review