Cited by 234Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsObesity, Physical Activity, DietObesity and Health Practices

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 49 of the 49 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Integrating Technology Into Standard Weight Loss Treatment: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Open access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A challenge in intensive obesity treatment is making care scalable. Little is known about whether the outcome of physician-directed weight loss treatment can be improved by adding mobile technology. METHODS: We conducted a 2-arm, 12-month study (October 1, 2007, through September 31, 2010). Seventy adults (body mass index >25 and ≤40 [calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared]) were randomly assigned either to standard-of-care group treatment alone (standard group) or to the standard and connective mobile technology system (+mobile group). Participants attended biweekly weight loss groups held by the Veterans Affairs outpatient clinic. The +mobile group was provided personal digital assistants to self-monitor diet and physical activity; they also received biweekly coaching calls for 6 months. Weight was measured at baseline and at 3-, 6-, 9-, and 12-month follow-up. RESULTS: Sixty-nine adults received intervention (mean age, 57.7 years; 85.5% were men). A longitudinal intent-to-treat analysis indicated that the +mobile group lost a mean of 3.9 kg more (representing 3.1% more weight loss relative to the control group; 95% CI, 2.2-5.5 kg) than the standard group at each postbaseline time point. Compared with the standard group, the +mobile group had significantly greater odds of having lost 5% or more of their baseline weight at each postbaseline time point (odds ratio, 6.5; 95% CI, 2.5-18.6). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of a personal digital assistant and telephone coaching can enhance short-term weight loss in combination with an existing system of care. Mobile connective technology holds promise as a scalable mechanism for augmenting the effect of physician-directed weight loss treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00371462.

Overview

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/jamainternmed.2013.1221

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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?

  • Electronic self-monitoring tools have led to better adherence to self-monitoring in BWL than paper-and-pencil tracking.

    “Electronic self-monitoring tools, as compared to paper-and-pencil tracking, have produced increased adherence to self-monitoring within BWL”

    From Associations Between Self-Monitoring and Weight Change in Behavioral Weight Loss Interventions (2019) · cites this paper as Spring et al., 2013

    The Intervention (Weight Loss) Phase describes PDA self-monitoring and coaching, but does not compare self-monitoring adherence with paper-and-pencil tracking. The Results section reports weight loss and MOVE! session attendance, not that adherence comparison; searches for self-monitoring adherence and paper-and-pencil recording found no such result in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Remote coaching by telephone, e-mail, or text to help users implement the intervention can be effective even without clinician referral or endorsement.

    “However, remote (telephone, e-mail, or text) coaching to help the user implement the intervention can also be effective, 67 even without the referral or endorsement of a clinician.”
  • Only a tiny fraction of computer programs, applications, sensors, and online communities have undergone testing for efficacy or harms.

    “Providers will want to become informed about these new technologies, particularly because only a tiny fraction of them have undergone testing for efficacy or harms.66–68”

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [4]The Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP): description of lifestyle intervention Diabetes Care 12 2002 25 12 2165 2171 12453955 PMC1282458
  2. [45]Charness N Fox MC Mitchum AL Fingerman CB K Antonnuci T Smith J Lifespan cognition and information technology Handbook of lifespan psychology 2010 Springer New York

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Spring, B., Duncan, J. M., Janke, E. A., Kozak, A. T., McFadden, H. G., DeMott, A., Pictor, A., Epstein, L. H., Siddique, J., Pellegrini, C. A., Buscemi, J., & Hedeker, D.
Affiliations
  • Northwestern University (US)
  • University of the Sciences (US)
  • Oakland University (US)
  • University at Buffalo, State University of New York (US)
  • University of Illinois Chicago (US)
Corresponding author
Spring, Bonnie
Venue
JAMA Internal Medicine
Published
2013-01-28
Volume
173
Issue
2
Pages
105
ISSN
2168-6106 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2024216767
Cited by
234
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 30 · 2013: 13
FWCI
35.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JAMA Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (1k07ca154862-01, UL1TR000150)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01HL075451, HL075451)
  • National Cancer Institute (K07-CA154862)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (P30DK092949)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity and Health Practices
Keywords
obesity treatment, weight loss, mobile health, personal digital assistants, telephone coaching, self-monitoring, veterans
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Obesity, Technology, Telephone, Weight Loss, Computers, Handheld, Weight Reduction Programs

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