Tiffany L Carson1, Bertha Hidalgo2, Jamy D Ard3, Olivia Affuso4. 1. Division of Preventive Medicine, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL; Nutrition Obesity Research Center, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL; Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL. Electronic address: slamona@uabmc.edu. 2. Department of Biostatistics, Section on Statistical Genetics, University of Alabama at Birmingham; Birmingham, AL. 3. Department of Epidemiology and Prevention, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, Winston Salem, NC. 4. Nutrition Obesity Research Center, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL; Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health; University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the literature to examine whether there has been adequate assessment of the effects of dietary intervention on quality of life (QOL) independent of weight loss, assess which instruments are being used to measure nutrition-related QOL, identify gaps in the literature, and suggest future directions. DESIGN: Systematic review guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Statement. RESULTS: A total of 24 studies were eligible for inclusion. The Short Form-36 Health Survey was the most widely used instrument to assess QOL. Other disease-specific instruments were used. Several different dietary approaches (eg, low carbohydrate, low calorie, low fat, combinations) were recommended. Across studies, QOL generally improved after participating in behavioral weight loss interventions, but findings revealed a lack of evidence to definitively determine whether reported changes in QOL were a result of weight loss or independent of it. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: It is important to consider how making broad dietary recommendations for all individuals might affect overall QOL in both positive and negative directions when considering factors other than weight loss and health improvement. If dietary interventions are adversely affecting QOL in other domains (eg, social, economic) and this relationship is not being detected or reported by current research practices, barriers for successful and sustainable dietary changes may not be fully understood.
OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the literature to examine whether there has been adequate assessment of the effects of dietary intervention on quality of life (QOL) independent of weight loss, assess which instruments are being used to measure nutrition-related QOL, identify gaps in the literature, and suggest future directions. DESIGN: Systematic review guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Statement. RESULTS: A total of 24 studies were eligible for inclusion. The Short Form-36 Health Survey was the most widely used instrument to assess QOL. Other disease-specific instruments were used. Several different dietary approaches (eg, low carbohydrate, low calorie, low fat, combinations) were recommended. Across studies, QOL generally improved after participating in behavioral weight loss interventions, but findings revealed a lack of evidence to definitively determine whether reported changes in QOL were a result of weight loss or independent of it. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: It is important to consider how making broad dietary recommendations for all individuals might affect overall QOL in both positive and negative directions when considering factors other than weight loss and health improvement. If dietary interventions are adversely affecting QOL in other domains (eg, social, economic) and this relationship is not being detected or reported by current research practices, barriers for successful and sustainable dietary changes may not be fully understood.
Authors: Gwinnett Ladson; William C Dodson; Stephanie D Sweet; Anthony E Archibong; Allen R Kunselman; Laurence M Demers; Nancy I Williams; Ponjola Coney; Richard S Legro Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2010-12-30 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: Lawrence J Appel; Catherine M Champagne; David W Harsha; Lawton S Cooper; Eva Obarzanek; Patricia J Elmer; Victor J Stevens; William M Vollmer; Pao-Hwa Lin; Laura P Svetkey; Sarah W Stedman; Deborah R Young Journal: JAMA Date: 2003 Apr 23-30 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: William S Yancy; Daniel Almirall; Matthew L Maciejewski; Ronette L Kolotkin; Jennifer R McDuffie; Eric C Westman Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2009-02-11 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Anne M Wolf; Mark R Conaway; Jayne Q Crowther; Kristen Y Hazen; Jerry L Nadler; Beverly Oneida; Viktor E Bovbjerg Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: M E Payne; K N Porter Starr; M Orenduff; H S Mulder; S R McDonald; A P Spira; C F Pieper; C W Bales Journal: J Nutr Health Aging Date: 2018 Impact factor: 4.075
Authors: Nicole M Gilbertson; Natalie Z M Eichner; Julian M Gaitán; John M Pirtle; Jennifer L Kirby; Clint M Upchurch; Norbert Leitinger; Steven K Malin Journal: Physiol Behav Date: 2022-01-13
Authors: Jesse P Caron; Margaret Ann Kreher; Angela M Mickle; Stanley Wu; Rene Przkora; Irene M Estores; Kimberly T Sibille Journal: Nutrients Date: 2022-06-18 Impact factor: 6.706
Authors: Seyede Hamide Rajaie; Sepideh Soltani; Zeinab Yazdanpanah; Tayebeh Zohrabi; Sara Beigrezaei; Sahar Mohseni-Takalloo; Mojtaba Kaviani; Scott C Forbes; Julien S Baker; Amin Salehi-Abargouei Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2022-05-06 Impact factor: 3.440
Authors: Fang Fang Zhang; Melissa M Hudson; I-Chan Huang; Nickhill Bhakta; Kirsten K Ness; Tara M Brinkman; James Klosky; Lu Lu; Fan Chen; Rohit P Ojha; Jennifer Q Lanctot; Leslie L Robison; Kevin R Krull Journal: Cancer Date: 2018-09-11 Impact factor: 6.860