Cited by 141Eating Disorders and BehaviorsObesity, Physical Activity, DietObesity and Health Practices

Evaluation of a modified cognitive-behavioural programme for weight management

Rapoport, L, Clark, M, Wardle, J·2000·International Journal of Obesity

Abstract

Objective To evaluate a modified cognitive-behavioural treatment (M-CBT) for weight management which addresses both the psychosocial costs and the physiological health risks of obesity, without a focus on weight loss.Design Randomized controlled trial comparing M-CBT with standard cognitive-behavioural therapy (S-CBT).Subjects Sixty-three overweight women with body mass index (BMI) > or = 28 kg/m2, mean age = 47.5 and mean BMI = 35.4.Measures Weight, waist and hip circumference, blood lipids, blood glucose, blood pressure, psychological well-being, depression, self esteem, stress, binge eating, eating style, body image, nutrient intake, aerobic fitness, activity levels, patient satisfaction with treatment.Results Both M-CBT and S-CBT achieved improvements in a broad range of physical, psychological and behavioural variables. Weight loss in the S-CBT group was greater than in the M-CBT group immediately after treatment, but both groups lost weight. Participants in the M-CBT group continued to lose weight up to the 1 y follow-up. M-CBT was evaluated positively by participants.Conclusions Both M-CBT and S-CBT programmes were successful at inducing modest weight loss, as well as improving emotional well-being, reducing distress, increasing activity and fitness, improving dietary quality and reducing cardio-vascular disease risk factors. The improvements were maintained or continued at 1 y follow-up. These results suggest that treatment based on the new weight-control paradigm which emphasizes sustained lifestyle change without emphasis on dieting, can produce modest benefits to health and well-being.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/sj.ijo.0801465

Cites

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 66 · Cited by 141

Authors
Rapoport, L., Clark, M., & Wardle, J.
Affiliations
University College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Wardle, J
Venue
International Journal of Obesity
Published
2000-12
Volume
24
Issue
12
Pages
1726-1737
ISSN
  • 0307-0565 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-5497
OpenAlex
W1999074454
Cited by
141
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 6
FWCI
1.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Obesity (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Eating Disorders and Behaviors
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Obesity and Health Practices
Keywords
cognitive behavioral therapy, weight management, obesity, overweight women, weight loss, lifestyle modification, binge eating, body image, psychological well-being, cardiovascular risk factors, physical activity, diet quality, treatment satisfaction
MeSH terms
Adipose Tissue, Adult, Behavior Therapy, Blood Glucose, Blood Pressure, Body Composition, Body Constitution, Body Image, Body Weight, Cardiovascular Diseases, Cognition, Depression, Diet, Feeding Behavior, Female, Humans, Lipids, Middle Aged, Obesity, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Risk Factors, Self Concept, Cohort Studies, Weight Loss, Exercise, Body Mass Index, Treatment Outcome

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