CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 126Eating Disorders and BehaviorsObesity and Health PracticesNutrition, Health and Food Behavior

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 58 of the 58 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Health-At-Every-Size and Eating Behaviors: 1-Year Follow-Up Results of a Size Acceptance Intervention

Provencher, Véronique, Bégin, Catherine, Tremblay, Angelo, Mongeau, Lyne, Corneau, Louise, Dodin, Sylvie, Boivin, Sonia, Lemieux, Simone·2009·Journal of the American Dietetic Association
DOI 10.1016/j.jada.2009.08.017
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background Poor long-term success observed with current weight-control strategies stresses the relevance to explore new weight management approaches.Objective To assess the effects of a Health-At-Every-Size (HAES) intervention on eating behaviors, appetite sensations, metabolic and anthropometric variables, and physical activity levels in women at 6-month and 1-year postintervention.Design Randomized controlled trial; measurements at baseline, at the end of the intervention period (4 months), and at 6-month and 1-year postintervention (10 months and 16 months, respectively). Intervention and testing took place from September 2003 to August 2006.Participants/setting Premenopausal overweight/obese women (n=144; mean age of 42.3+/-5.6 years), recruited from free-living, general community.Intervention Women were randomly assigned to: HAES group (n=48), social support group (n=48), or control group (n=48).Main outcome measures Eating behaviors (restraint, disinhibition, and susceptibility to hunger), appetite ratings (desire to eat, hunger, fullness, and prospective food consumption), anthropometric and metabolic variables (body mass index, waist and hip circumferences, blood lipid levels, and blood pressure), and engagement in moderate to intense physical activity (energy cost > or =1.2 k cal x kg(-1) x 15 minutes(-1) [> or =4.8 metabolic equivalents]).Statistical analyses performed Changes for each dependent variable were assessed by linear mixed models according to a group (HAES vs social support vs control) by time (baseline vs 4 months vs 10 months vs 16 months) split-plot design.Results Situational susceptibility to disinhibition and susceptibility to hunger significantly decreased over time in both HAES group (-0.9+/-0.2 and -1.3+/-0.5, respectively) and the social support group (-0.4+/- 0.2 and -1.4+/-0.5, respectively). Although eating behavior scores observed at 16 months did not differ between HAES and social support groups (situational susceptibility to disinhibition: 2.5+/-0.2 in HAES group vs 2.7 +/- 0.2 in social support group; susceptibility to hunger: 4.2+/-0.5 in both groups), they were lower in these groups than scores noted in the control group (3.3+/-0.2 for situational susceptibility to disinhibition and 5.9+/-0.5 for susceptibility to hunger).Conclusions These results suggest that, when compared to a control group, an HAES approach could have long-term beneficial effects on eating behaviors related to disinhibition and hunger. In addition, our study did not show distinctive effects of the HAES approach in comparison to a social support intervention.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jada.2009.08.017

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Brownell, 1994, The dieting maelstrom, Am Psychol, 49, 781, 10.1037/0003-066X.49.9.781 · DOI
  2. Hill, 1986, The effects of a high-protein or high-carbohydrate meal on subjective motivation to eat and food preferences, Nut Behav, 3, 133

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 126

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Provencher, V., Bégin, C., Tremblay, A., Mongeau, L., Corneau, L., Dodin, S., Boivin, S., & Lemieux, S.
Affiliations
Université Laval (CA)
Corresponding author
Lemieux, Simone
ORCID
Venue
Journal of the American Dietetic Association
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-11
Volume
109
Issue
11
Pages
1854-1861
ISSN
0002-8223 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jada.2009.08.017
OpenAlex
W2162499119
Cited by
126
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 6
FWCI
5.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Journal of the American Dietetic Association (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Canadian Institutes of Health Research (64226_1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Eating Disorders and Behaviors
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity and Health Practices
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
Keywords
Health at Every Size, dietary habits, appetite, disinhibition, dietary restraint, social support, overweight women, obesity, weight management, physical activity, serum lipids, blood pressure, body mass index, waist and hip circumference, long-term follow-up, weight control strategies, body image, body dissatisfaction, body acceptance
MeSH terms
Adult, Appetite, Feeding and Eating Disorders, Body Image, Body Weight, Diet, Reducing, Feeding Behavior, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Hunger, Obesity, Physical Fitness, Social Support, Health Behavior, Exercise, Body Mass Index, Linear Models, Treatment Outcome, Premenopause, 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