Cited by 58Medication Adherence and ComplianceBehavioral Health and InterventionsDiabetes Management and Education

Adherence is a multi-dimensional construct in the POUNDS LOST trial

Open access
Williamson, Donald A., Anton, Stephen D., Han, Hongmei, Champagne, Catherine M., Allen, Ray, LeBlanc, Eric, Ryan, Donna H., McManus, Katherine +5 more·2010·Journal of Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

Research on the conceptualization of adherence to treatment has not addressed a key question: Is adherence best defined as being a uni-dimensional or multi-dimensional behavioral construct? The primary aim of this study was to test which of these conceptual models best described adherence to a weight management program. This ancillary study was conducted as a part of the POUNDS LOST trial that tested the efficacy of four dietary macronutrient compositions for promoting weight loss. A sample of 811 overweight/obese adults was recruited across two clinical sites, and each participant was randomly assigned to one of four macronutrient prescriptions: (1) Low fat (20% of energy), average protein (15% of energy); (2) High fat (40%), average protein (15%); (3) Low fat (20%), high protein (25%); (4) High fat (40%), high protein (25%). Throughout the first 6 months of the study, a computer tracking system collected data on eight indicators of adherence. Computer tracking data from the initial 6 months of the intervention were analyzed using exploratory and confirmatory analyses. Two factors (accounting for 66% of the variance) were identified and confirmed: (1) behavioral adherence and (2) dietary adherence. Behavioral adherence did not differ across the four interventions, but prescription of a high fat diet (vs. a low fat diet) was found to be associated with higher levels of dietary adherence. The findings of this study indicated that adherence to a weight management program was best conceptualized as being multi-dimensional, with two dimensions: behavioral and dietary adherence.

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 · 10.1007/s10865-009-9230-7

Cites

24 of 24 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?

  • Adherence in the first 6 months of the POUNDS LOST trial predicted weight reduction throughout the trial.

    “Adherence in the first 6 months of the POUNDS LOST trial predicted weight reduction throughout the trial.33”

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

1 of the 25 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Nunnally JC Bernstein IH Psychometric theory 1994 McGraw-Hill, Inc. New York 3rd ed

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Williamson, D. A., Anton, S. D., Han, H., Champagne, C. M., Allen, R., LeBlanc, E., Ryan, D. H., McManus, K., Laranjo, N., Carey, V. J., Loria, C. M., Bray, G. A., & Sacks, F. M.
Affiliations
  • Pennington Biomedical Research Center (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Williamson, Donald A.
Venue
Journal of Behavioral Medicine
Published
2009-10-25
Volume
33
Issue
1
Pages
35-46
ISSN
  • 0160-7715 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-3521
OpenAlex
W2076143725
Cited by
58
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 6
FWCI
3.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Behavioral Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Institute on Aging (P30AG028740)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (HL073286, U01HL073286)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (P30DK040561)
  • National Center for Research Resources (RR02635, M01RR002635)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Medication Adherence and Compliance
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
Keywords
medication adherence, behavioral adherence, dietary adherence, weight management, macronutrient composition, high-fat diet, low-fat diet, high-protein diet, overweight and obesity, POUNDS Lost trial
MeSH terms
Behavior, Computers, Diet, Diet, Reducing, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Models, Psychological, Obesity, Patient Compliance, Time Factors, Cohort Studies, Overweight

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