Cited by 113Obesity and Health PracticesObesity, Physical Activity, DietBehavioral Health and Interventions

Motivational interviewing fails to improve outcomes of a behavioral weight loss program for obese African American women: a pilot randomized trial

Befort, Christie A., Nollen, Nicole, Ellerbeck, Edward F., Sullivan, Debra K., Thomas, Janet L., Ahluwalia, Jasjit S.·2008·Journal of Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

Compared to other racial/ethnic groups, African American (AA) women are more likely to be obese but less likely to participate in weight loss interventions or to successfully lose weight. Sustained motivation for weight loss may be especially difficult for AA women due to socioeconomic and cultural factors. The purpose of this study was to examine whether the addition of motivational interviewing (MI) to a culturally-targeted behavioral weight loss program for AA women improved adherence to the program, diet and physical activity behaviors, and weight loss outcomes. Forty-four obese (mean BMI = 39.4, SD = 7.1) AA women were randomized to receive a 16-week behavioral weight loss program plus four MI sessions, or the same behavioral weight loss program plus four health education (HE; attention control) sessions. Results showed that participants in both MI and HE conditions lost a significant amount of weight, reduced their energy intake and percent calories from fat, and increased their fruit and vegetable consumption (ps < .05). However, adherence to the behavioral weight loss program and changes in diet, physical activity, and weight did not differ across MI and HE conditions. Future research is warranted to determine the subpopulations with which MI is most effective.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10865-008-9161-8

Cites

64 of 64 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Befort, C. A., Nollen, N., Ellerbeck, E. F., Sullivan, D. K., Thomas, J. L., & Ahluwalia, J. S.
Affiliations
  • University of Kansas Medical Center (US)
  • University of Minnesota (US)
Corresponding author
Befort, Christie A.
Venue
Journal of Behavioral Medicine
Published
2008-06-28
Volume
31
Issue
5
Pages
367-377
ISSN
  • 0160-7715 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-3521
OpenAlex
W1977440878
Cited by
113
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 8
FWCI
22.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Behavioral Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
American Cancer Society
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Obesity and Health Practices
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
Keywords
motivational interviewing, obesity, African American women, behavioral weight loss program, culturally targeted interventions, health education, weight loss outcomes, dietary adherence, physical activity, fruit and vegetable intake, energy intake, dietary fat intake
MeSH terms
Adult, Behavior Therapy, Black or African American, Counseling, Diet, Reducing, Female, Humans, Life Style, Middle Aged, Motivation, Motor Activity, Obesity, Patient Compliance, Patient Education as Topic, Personal Satisfaction, Pilot Projects, Psychotherapy, Group, Women, Weight Loss, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Body Mass Index, Treatment Outcome, Self Efficacy

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