Cited by 123Nutrition, Health and Food BehaviorRegulation of Appetite and ObesityObesity, Physical Activity, Diet

Lifestyle determinants of the drive to eat: a meta-analysis

Open access
Chapman, Colin Daniel, Benedict, Christian, Brooks, Samantha Jane, Birgir Schiöth, Helgi·2012·The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition

Abstract

Background Obesity is emerging as the most significant health concern of the 21st century. Although this is attributable in part to changes in our environment-including the increased prevalence of energy-dense food-it also appears that several lifestyle factors may increase our vulnerability to this calorie-rich landscape. Epidemiologic studies have begun to show links between adiposity and behaviors such as television watching, alcohol intake, and sleep deprivation. However, these studies leave unclear the direction of this association. In addition, studies that investigated the acute impact of these factors on food intake have reported a wide variety of effect sizes, from highly positive to slightly negative.Objective The purpose of this article was to provide a meta-analysis of the relation between lifestyle choices and increases in acute food intake.Design An initial search was performed on PubMed to collect articles relating television watching, sleep deprivation, and alcohol consumption to food intake. Only articles published before February 2012 were considered. Studies that took place in a controlled, laboratory setting with healthy individuals were included. Studies were analyzed by using 3 meta-analyses with random-effects models. In addition, a 1-factor ANOVA was run to discover any main effect of lifestyle.Results The 3 most prominent lifestyle factors-television watching, alcohol intake, and sleep deprivation-had significant short-term effects on food intake, with alcohol being more significant (Cohen's d = 1.03) than sleep deprivation (Cohen's d = 0.49) and television watching (Cohen's d = 0.2).Conclusions Our results suggest that television watching, alcohol intake, and sleep deprivation are not merely correlated with obesity but likely contribute to it by encouraging excessive eating. Because these behaviors are all known to affect cognitive functions involved in reward saliency and inhibitory control, it may be that they represent common mechanisms through which this eating is facilitated.

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 · 10.3945/ajcn.112.039750

Cites

63 of 63 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?

  • Habitual sleep loss could result in significant weight gain, and one pathway through which this could happen is increasing energy intake.

    “Thus, habitual sleep loss could result in significant weight gain and one pathway though which this could happen is increasing energy intake.”
  • In a meta-analysis of 23 controlled laboratory studies in healthy participants, the effect on food intake was greatest for alcohol (Cohen's d = 1.03; 95% CI: 0.66, 1.4; P < 0.001), followed by sleep deprivation (Cohen's d = 0.49; 95% CI: 0.11, 0.88; P < 0.05).

    “Recently, a meta-analysis compared the effect of alcohol, sleep deprivation and TV watching on food intake using 23 controlled, laboratory studies in healthy participants and found that the effect was greatest for alcohol (Cohen’s d = 1.03; 95% CI: 0.66, 1.4; P , 0.001) followed by sleep deprivation (Cohen’s d = 0.49; 95% CI: 0.11, 0.88; P , 0.05) [176].”

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
Chapman, C. D., Benedict, C., Brooks, S. J., & Birgir Schiöth, H.
Affiliations
Uppsala University (SE)
Corresponding author
Chapman, Colin Daniel
Venue
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-09
Volume
96
Issue
3
Pages
492-497
ISSN
0002-9165 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2115517581
Cited by
123
References
63
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Brain Research Foundation
  • Novo Nordisk
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Regulation of Appetite and Obesity
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Keywords
television viewing, alcohol consumption, sleep deprivation, obesity, lifestyle factors, energy-dense foods, inhibitory control, overeating
MeSH terms
Alcohol Drinking, Appetite Regulation, Energy Intake, Feeding Behavior, Humans, Life Style, Models, Biological, Obesity, Sleep Deprivation, Television, Sedentary Behavior

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