OBJECTIVE: Web-based treatment programs are attractive in primary care because of their ability to reach numerous individuals at low cost. Our aim of this meta-analysis is to systematically review the weight loss or maintenance effect of the Internet component in obesity treatment programs. METHODS: MEDLINE and EMBASE literature searches were conducted to identify studies investigating the effect of Web-based individualized advice on lifestyle modification on weight loss. Randomized controlled trials that consisted of a Web-user experimental and non-Web user control group were included. Weight changes in the experimental group in comparison with the control group were pooled with a random-effects model. RESULTS: A total of 23 studies comprising 8697 participants were included. Overall, using the Internet had a modest but significant additional weight-loss effect compared with non-Web user control groups (-0.68 kg, P=0.03). In comparison with the control group, stratified analysis indicated that using the Internet as an adjunct to obesity care was effective (-1.00 kg, P<0.001), but that using it as a substitute for face-to-face support was unfavorable (+1.27 kg, P=0.01). An additional effect on weight control was observed when the aim of using the Internet was initial weight loss (-1.01 kg; P=0.03), but was not observed when the aim was weight maintenance (+0.68 kg; P=0.26). The relative effect was diminished with longer educational periods (P-trend=0.04) and was insignificant (-0.20 kg; P=0.75) in studies with educational periods of 12 months or more. CONCLUSION: The current meta-analysis indicates that the Internet component in obesity treatment programs has a modest effect on weight control. However, the effect was inconsistent, largely depending on the type of usage of the Internet or the period of its use.
OBJECTIVE: Web-based treatment programs are attractive in primary care because of their ability to reach numerous individuals at low cost. Our aim of this meta-analysis is to systematically review the weight loss or maintenance effect of the Internet component in obesity treatment programs. METHODS: MEDLINE and EMBASE literature searches were conducted to identify studies investigating the effect of Web-based individualized advice on lifestyle modification on weight loss. Randomized controlled trials that consisted of a Web-user experimental and non-Web user control group were included. Weight changes in the experimental group in comparison with the control group were pooled with a random-effects model. RESULTS: A total of 23 studies comprising 8697 participants were included. Overall, using the Internet had a modest but significant additional weight-loss effect compared with non-Web user control groups (-0.68 kg, P=0.03). In comparison with the control group, stratified analysis indicated that using the Internet as an adjunct to obesity care was effective (-1.00 kg, P<0.001), but that using it as a substitute for face-to-face support was unfavorable (+1.27 kg, P=0.01). An additional effect on weight control was observed when the aim of using the Internet was initial weight loss (-1.01 kg; P=0.03), but was not observed when the aim was weight maintenance (+0.68 kg; P=0.26). The relative effect was diminished with longer educational periods (P-trend=0.04) and was insignificant (-0.20 kg; P=0.75) in studies with educational periods of 12 months or more. CONCLUSION: The current meta-analysis indicates that the Internet component in obesity treatment programs has a modest effect on weight control. However, the effect was inconsistent, largely depending on the type of usage of the Internet or the period of its use.
Authors: Katherine M Livingstone; Carlos Celis-Morales; Santiago Navas-Carretero; Rodrigo San-Cristobal; Clare B O'Donovan; Hannah Forster; Clara Woolhead; Cyril F M Marsaux; Anna L Macready; Rosalind Fallaize; Silvia Kolossa; Lydia Tsirigoti; Christina P Lambrinou; George Moschonis; Magdalena Godlewska; Agnieszka Surwiłło; Christian A Drevon; Yannis Manios; Iwona Traczyk; Eileen R Gibney; Lorraine Brennan; Marianne C Walsh; Julie A Lovegrove; J Alfredo Martinez; Wim H Saris; Hannelore Daniel; Mike Gibney; John C Mathers Journal: Eur J Nutr Date: 2015-04-17 Impact factor: 5.614
Authors: David M Levine; Stella Savarimuthu; Allison Squires; Joseph Nicholson; Melanie Jay Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2014-08-19 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Tanya T Olmos-Ochoa; Noosha Niv; Gerhard Hellemann; Amy N Cohen; Rebecca Oberman; Richard Goldberg; Alexander S Young Journal: Psychiatr Rehabil J Date: 2019-05-13
Authors: Carlos Celis-Morales; Katherine M Livingstone; Cyril F M Marsaux; Hannah Forster; Clare B O'Donovan; Clara Woolhead; Anna L Macready; Rosalind Fallaize; Santiago Navas-Carretero; Rodrigo San-Cristobal; Silvia Kolossa; Kai Hartwig; Lydia Tsirigoti; Christina P Lambrinou; George Moschonis; Magdalena Godlewska; Agnieszka Surwiłło; Keith Grimaldi; Jildau Bouwman; E J Daly; Victor Akujobi; Rick O'Riordan; Jettie Hoonhout; Arjan Claassen; Ulrich Hoeller; Thomas E Gundersen; Siv E Kaland; John N S Matthews; Yannis Manios; Iwona Traczyk; Christian A Drevon; Eileen R Gibney; Lorraine Brennan; Marianne C Walsh; Julie A Lovegrove; J Alfredo Martinez; Wim H M Saris; Hannelore Daniel; Mike Gibney; John C Mathers Journal: Genes Nutr Date: 2014-12-10 Impact factor: 5.523
Authors: Natalie Gold; Amy Yau; Benjamin Rigby; Chris Dyke; Elizabeth Alice Remfry; Tim Chadborn Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2021-05-14 Impact factor: 5.428