Cited by 176Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsDiabetes Treatment and ManagementDiabetes Management and Education

The Look AHEAD Trial: a review and discussion of its outcomes

Open access
Pi-Sunyer, Xavier·2014·Current Nutrition Reports

Abstract

The LookAhead trial was a randomized controlled trial comparing an Intensive Lifestyle Intervention (ILI) to a Diabetes Support and Education (DSE) in overweight and obese type 2 diabetes patients to track the development of cardiovascular disease over time. The triaI intervention was stopped for futility after a median follow-up of 9.6 years. While there was a differential effect on weight loss and fitness between the two groups, there was no effect on cardiovascular outcomes. Cardiovascular events were less than half the projected rate per year in the DSE group: thus there was a very low over-all rate of events in both groups. There were many other health benefits of ILI, including improved biomarkers of glucose and lipid control, less sleep apnea, lower liver fat, less depression, improved insulin sensitivity, less urinary incontinence, less kidney disease, reduced need of diabetes medications, maintenance of physical mobility, improved quality of life and lower costs.

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/s13668-014-0099-x

Cites

34 of 34 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?

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 35 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [1]International Diabetes Federation IDF Diabetes Atlas 2013 6th edn. Brussels, Belgium International Diabetes Federation http://www.idf.org/diabetesatlas. 35914061
  2. [6]NIH press release 2012 10 19
  3. [33]Look AHEAD Research Group Wadden TA West DS The Look AHEAD study: a description of the lifestyle intervention and the evidence supporting it Obesity (Silver Spring) 2006 14 737 752 [Erratum, Obesity (Silver Spring) 2007; 15: 1339.] 16855180 PMC2613279

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pi-Sunyer, X.
Venue
Current Nutrition Reports
Published
2014-09-28
Volume
3
Issue
4
Pages
387-391
ISSN
2161-3311 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2077801798
Cited by
176
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 6
FWCI
5.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Nutrition Reports (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (U01DK057178)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
Keywords
Look AHEAD trial, intensive lifestyle intervention, type 2 diabetes, obesity, overweight, diabetes support and education, cardiovascular disease, weight loss, physical fitness, sleep apnea, liver fat, insulin sensitivity, kidney disease, depression, urinary incontinence, quality of life, cost-effectiveness

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