Cited by 202Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsObesity, Physical Activity, DietObesity and Health Practices

Web-based weight loss in primary care: a randomized controlled trial

Open access
Bennett, Gary G., Herring, Sharon J., Puleo, Elaine, Stein, Evelyn K., Emmons, Karen M., Gillman, Matthew W.·2010·Obesity

Abstract

Evidence is lacking regarding effective and sustainable weight loss approaches for use in the primary care setting. We conducted a 12-week randomized controlled trial to evaluate the short-term efficacy of a web-based weight loss intervention among 101 primary care patients with obesity and hypertension. Patients had access to a comprehensive website that used a moderate-intensity weight loss approach designed specifically for web-based implementation. Patients also participated in four (two in-person and two telephonic) counseling sessions with a health coach. Intent-to-treat analysis showed greater weight loss at 3 months (-2.56 kg; 95% CI -3.60, -1.53) among intervention participants (-2.28 +/- 3.21 kg), relative to usual care (0.28 +/- 1.87 kg). Similar findings were observed among intervention completers (-3.05 kg; 95% CI -4.24, -1.85). High rates of participant retention (84%) and website utilization were observed, with the greatest weight loss found among those with a high frequency of website logins (quartile 4 vs. 1: -4.16 kg; 95% CI -1.47, -6.84). The intervention's approach promoted moderate weight loss at 12 weeks, though greater weight loss was observed among those with higher levels of website utilization. Efficacious web-based weight loss interventions can be successfully offered in the primary care setting.

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 · 10.1038/oby.2009.242

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?

  • Bennett 2010 stated that research staff collecting evaluation data were blinded to randomization status.

    “Bennett 2010 stated that research staff collecting evaluation data were blinded to randomization status.”
  • After 10 to 14 weeks of treatment, the five individual trials with weight loss measurements at three months showed that participants in the computer-based intervention groups lost more weight than participants in the minimal intervention control groups (MD -2.5 kg, 95% CI -3.4 to -1.6, P < 0.00001; 430 participants; five trials).

    “After 10 to 14 weeks of treatment, the five individual trials with weight loss measurements at three months (Bennett 2010; Morgan 2009; Morgan 2011; Schroder 2010; Threlfall 1984) showed that participants in the computer-based intervention groups lost more weight than participants in the minimal intervention control groups (mean difference (MD) −2.5 kg (95% confidence interval (CI) −3.4 to −1.6),”
  • One trial (Bennett 2010) did not describe the method of randomization, but did state that assignments were enclosed in nontransparent envelopes, and the review judged that allocation was adequately concealed.

    “One trial (Bennett 2010) did not describe the method of randomization, but did state that assignments were enclosed in nontransparent envelopes, and we therefore judged that allocation was adequately concealed.”
  • Several trials (Bennett 2010; Hunter 2008; Morgan 2009; Morgan 2011; Wylie-Rosett 2001) tested for and demonstrated statistically significant positive associations between amount of computer use and amount of weight loss in the intervention group.

    “Several trials (Bennett 2010; Hunter 2008; Morgan 2009; Morgan 2011; Wylie-Rosett 2001) tested for and demonstrated statistically significant positive associations between amount of computer use, measured in a variety of ways, and amount of weight loss in the intervention group.”
  • In the one study reporting percent weight loss at three months (Bennett 2010), participants in the computer intervention lost 3% more body weight (or approximately 2.5 kg) compared to participants in the control group (MD -3.0%, 95% CI -4.1 to -1.9, P < 0.00001; 101 participants, one trial).

    “In the one study reporting percent weight loss at three months (Bennett 2010), participants in the computer intervention lost 3% more body weight (or approximately 2.5 kg) compared to participants in the control group (MD −3.0% (95% CI −4.1 to −1.9); P < 0.00001; 101 participants, one trial, Analysis 1.4).”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bennett, G. G., Herring, S. J., Puleo, E., Stein, E. K., Emmons, K. M., & Gillman, M. W.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Harvard Pilgrim Health Care (US)
  • University of Massachusetts Amherst (US)
  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Bennett, Gary G.
Venue
Obesity
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-02
Volume
18
Issue
2
Pages
308-313
ISSN
  • 1930-7381 (ISSN-L)
  • 1930-739X
OpenAlex
W1991807359
Cited by
202
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 15
FWCI
20.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Obesity (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5k05ca124415-05)
  • U.S. Public Health Service (#5 T32 HP11001-19)
  • National Cancer Institute (K22CA126992, K05-CA124415, 1K05CA124415-01A1)
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 › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Obesity and Health Practices
Keywords
hypertension, primary care, health coaching, website utilization, participant retention, weight loss efficacy, digital health
MeSH terms
Counseling, Female, Goals, Health Promotion, Humans, Hypertension, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Middle Aged, Obesity, Patient Compliance, Primary Health Care, Self Care, Time Factors, Weight Loss, Health Behavior, Treatment Outcome, Internet

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