Weight loss and frequency of body‐weight self‐monitoring in an online commercial weight management program with and without a cellular‐connected ‘smart’ scale: a randomized pilot study
Open accessAbstract
Summary: Objective: Evaluate the effects of an online commercial weight management program, with and without provision of a ‘smart’ scale with instructions to weigh daily and weekly tailored feedback, on weight loss and the frequency of body‐weight self‐monitoring. Methods: Participants (N = 92; body mass index 27–40 kg/m 2) were randomized to 6 months of no‐cost access to the Weight Watchers Online (WWO) platform alone, or enhanced with a cellular‐connected ‘smart’ scale, instructions to weigh daily and weekly pre‐scripted email feedback (Weight Watchers Online Enhanced [WWO‐E]). The number of days that weight was self‐monitored (via ‘smart’ scale in WWO‐E and manually in WWO) was recorded automatically across the 6‐month trial. Objective weight was measured at baseline, 3 and 6 months. Results: While both groups achieved statistically significant weight loss, mean ± standard error weight loss did not differ between WWO‐E and WWO at 3 months (5.1 ± 0.6 kg vs. 4.0 ± 0.7 kg, respectively; p = 0.257) or 6 months (5.3 ± 0.6 kg vs. 3.9 ± 0.7 kg, respectively; p = 0.116). However, a greater proportion of WWO‐E lost ≥5% of initial body weight at 3 months (52.2% vs. 28.3%; p = 0.033), but not 6 months (43.5% vs. 30.4%; p = 0.280), compared with WWO. Mean ± standard deviation days with self‐monitored weight was higher in WWO‐E (80.5 ± 5.6; 44.7% of days) than WWO (12.0 ± 1.0; 6.7% of days; p < 0.001) across the 6‐month study period. Conclusions: This is the first study to show that provision of a ‘smart’ scale with weekly tailored feedback substantially increased the frequency of self‐weighing and the proportion of participants achieving an initial clinically significant ≥5% weight loss (52% vs. 28%) in an online commercial weight management program. Both WWO and WWO‐E produced significant weight loss over 6 months. While mean weight losses were slightly greater in the enhanced group, the difference was not statistically significant in this small sample. This study provides support for the clinical utility of online commercial weight management programs and the potential for supporting technology such as ‘smart’ scales to improve adherence to body‐weight self‐monitoring and clinical outcomes.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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 Thomas et al., 2017
The Results report substantially more frequent body-weight self-monitoring with a smart scale than in the standard program. But the Methods (Study design; page not provided) say the comparison group entered weights through a website or mobile app, not on paper; the study therefore does not establish the claimed electronic-versus-paper comparison. (LLM, conf=0.90)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredPrevious studies showed that merely adding tracking tools to BWL may be of no benefit, or even have iatrogenic effects.
“Given previous studies showing that merely adding tracking tools to BWL may be of no benefit, or even have iatrogenic effects, use of these tools would have to be accompanied by a careful intervention strategy to guide participants in summarizing and interpreting their data to inform behavior change (Jakicic et al., 2016; Thomas et al., 2017).”
From Associations Between Self-Monitoring and Weight Change in Behavioral Weight Loss Interventions (2019) · cites this paper as Thomas et al., 2017
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
Self-monitoring in weight loss: a systematic review of the literature
Burke, L. E., Wang, J., & Sevick, M. A. (2011) · Journal of the American Dietetic Association · doi:10.1016/j.jada.2010.10.008 · Cited by 1,203 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Historically, self-monitoring of body weight occurred by stepping on a home scale and recording the entry in a paper diary; feedback was delivered in a verbal and/or written format in structured weight loss programs (6).”
BackgroundSwan, M. (2012) · Journal of Sensor and Actuator Networks · doi:10.3390/jsan1030217 · Cited by 934 · see citing works
Consistent Self‐monitoring of Weight: A Key Component of Successful Weight Loss Maintenance
Butryn, M. L., Phelan, S., Hill, J. O., & Wing, R. R. (2007) · Obesity · doi:10.1038/oby.2007.368 · Cited by 483 · see citing works
Self-citationCost Effectiveness of Internet Interventions: Review and Recommendations
Tate, D. F., Finkelstein, E. A., Khavjou, O., & Gustafson, A. (2009) · Annals of Behavioral Medicine · doi:10.1007/s12160-009-9131-6 · Cited by 261 · see citing works
Self-citationThe efficacy of a daily self‐weighing weight loss intervention using smart scales and e‐mail
Steinberg, D. M., Tate, D. F., Bennett, G. G., Ennett, S., Samuel‐Hodge, C., & Ward, D. S. (2013) · Obesity · doi:10.1002/oby.20396 · Cited by 212 · see citing works
Self-citationSelf-weighing in weight management: A systematic literature review
Zheng, Y., Klem, M. L., Sereika, S. M., Danford, C. A., Ewing, L. J., & Burke, L. E. (2015) · Obesity · doi:10.1002/oby.20946 · Cited by 196 · see citing works
The Impact of Regular Self-weighing on Weight Management: A Systematic Literature Review
VanWormer, J. J., French, S. A., Pereira, M. A., & Welsh, E. M. (2008) · International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity · doi:10.1186/1479-5868-5-54 · Cited by 163 · see citing works
Sherrington, A., Newham, J. J., Bell, R., Adamson, A., McColl, E., & Araujo‐Soares, V. (2016) · Obesity Reviews · doi:10.1111/obr.12396 · Cited by 138 · see citing works
Thomas, J. G., Raynor, H. A., Bond, D. S., Luke, A. K., Cardoso, C. C., Foster, G. D., & Wing, R. R. (2017) · Obesity · doi:10.1002/oby.21846 · Cited by 100 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- [2]Arem H, Irwin M. A review of web‐based weight loss interventions in adults. Obes Rev. 2011; 12: e236– e243. 20804523 PMC3086798
- [3]Mateo GF, Granado‐Font E, Ferré‐Grau C, Montaña‐Carreras X. Mobile phone apps to promote weight loss and increase physical activity: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2015; 17: e253. 26554314 PMC4704965
- [5]Stephens J, Allen J. Mobile phone interventions to increase physical activity and reduce weight: a systematic review. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2013; 28: 320– 329. 22635061 PMC3681804
- [8]Madigan CD, Daley AJ, Lewis AL, Aveyard P, Jolly K. Is self‐weighing an effective tool for weight loss: a systematic literature review and meta‐analysis. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2015; 12: 104. 26293454 PMC4546162
- [11]Tate DF, Jackvony EH, Wing RR. A randomized trial comparing human e‐mail counseling, computer‐automated tailored counseling, and no counseling in an Internet weight loss program. Arch Intern Med. 2006; 166: 1620– 1625. 16908795
- [12]Wing RR, Crane MM, Thomas JG, Kumar R, Weinberg B. Improving weight loss outcomes of community interventions by incorporating behavioral strategies. Am J Public Health. 2010; 100: 2513– 2519. 20966375 PMC2978171
- [15]DiClemente CC, Marinilli AS, Singh M, Bellino LE. The role of feedback in the process of health behavior change. Am J Health Behav. 2001; 25: 217– 227. 11322620
- [17]Jakicic JM, Davis KK, Rogers RJ, et al. Effect of wearable technlogy combined with a lifestyle intervention on long‐term weight loss: The IDEA randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2016; 316: 1161– 1171. 27654602 PMC5480209
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Forman, E. M., Goldstein, S. P., Crochiere, R. J., Butryn, M. L., Juarascio, A. S., Zhang, F., & Foster, G. D. (2019) · Translational Behavioral Medicine · doi:10.1093/tbm/ibz137 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
Self-citationForman, E. M., Goldstein, S. P., Zhang, F., Evans, B. C., Manasse, S. M., Butryn, M. L., Juarascio, A. S., Abichandani, P., Martin, G. J., & Foster, G. D. (2019) · Translational Behavioral Medicine · doi:10.1093/tbm/iby016 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
Self-citationAssociations Between Self-Monitoring and Weight Change in Behavioral Weight Loss Interventions
Goldstein, S. P., Goldstein, C. M., Bond, D. S., Raynor, H. A., Wing, R. R., & Thomas, J. G. (2019) · Health Psychology · doi:10.1037/hea0000800 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
“Electronic self-monitoring tools, as compared to paper-and-pencil tracking, have produced increased adherence to self-monitoring within BWL (Carter, Burley, Nykjaer, & Cade, 2013; Spring et al., 2013; Thomas et al., 2017) and this should presumably lead to greater weight losses (Turk et al.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citation
- Authors
- Thomas, J. G., Raynor, H. A., Bond, D. S., Luke, A. K., Cardoso, C. C., Wojtanowski, A. C., Vander Veur, S., Tate, D., Wing, R. R., & Foster, G. D.
- Affiliations
- Brown University (US)
- University of Tennessee at Knoxville (US)
- WW International, Inc. (United States) (US)
- Weight Watchers International, Inc. New York City NY USA
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
- Corresponding author
- Thomas, J. G.
- Venue
- Obesity Science & Practice
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2017-10-13
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 365-372
- ISSN
- 2055-2238 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC5729493
- OpenAlex
- W2751742498
- Cited by
- 45
- References
- 9
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3
- FWCI
- 6.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Obesity Science & Practice (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Weight Watchers International, Inc. (N/A)
- 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 › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
- Keywords
- weight loss, smart scales, personalized feedback, weight loss maintenance, obesity treatment, digital health interventions, email feedback
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
