Dori M Steinberg1, Deborah F Tate2, Gary G Bennett3, Susan Ennett4, Carmen Samuel-Hodge5, Dianne S Ward6. 1. Department of Nutrition, Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill; Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill; Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill; Duke Obesity Prevention Program, Duke Global Health Institute, Duke University, North Carolina. Electronic address: dori.steinberg@duke.edu. 2. Department of Nutrition, Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill; Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill; Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill; Duke Obesity Prevention Program, Duke Global Health Institute, Duke University, North Carolina. 3. Duke Obesity Prevention Program, Duke Global Health Institute, Duke University, North Carolina; Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Duke University, North Carolina. 4. Department of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill; Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill; Duke Obesity Prevention Program, Duke Global Health Institute, Duke University, North Carolina. 5. Department of Nutrition, Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill. 6. Department of Nutrition, Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill; Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite evidence that daily self-weighing is an effective strategy for weight control, concerns remain regarding the potential for negative psychological consequences. PURPOSE: The goal of the study was to examine the impact of a daily self-weighing weight-loss intervention on relevant psychological constructs. DESIGN: A 6-month RCT. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: The study sample (N=91) included overweight men and women in the Chapel Hill NC area. INTERVENTION: Between February and August 2011, participants were randomly assigned to a daily self-weighing intervention or delayed-intervention control group. The 6-month intervention included daily self-weighing for self-regulation of diet and exercise behaviors using an e-scale that transmitted weights to a study website. Weekly e-mailed lessons and tailored feedback on daily self-weighing adherence and weight-loss progress were provided. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-weighing frequency was measured throughout the study using e-scales. Weight was measured in-clinic at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months. Psychological outcomes were assessed via self-report at the same time points. RESULTS: In 2012, using linear mixed models and generalized estimating equation models, there were no significant differences between groups in depressive symptoms, anorectic cognitions, disinhibition, susceptibility to hunger, and binge eating. At 6 months, there was a significant group X time interaction for body dissatisfaction (p=0.007) and dietary restraint (p<0.001), with the intervention group reporting lower body dissatisfaction and greater dietary restraint compared to controls. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that a weight-loss intervention that focuses on daily self-weighing does not cause adverse psychological outcomes. This suggests that daily self-weighing is an effective and safe weight-control strategy among overweight adults attempting to lose weight. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov NCT01369004.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Despite evidence that daily self-weighing is an effective strategy for weight control, concerns remain regarding the potential for negative psychological consequences. PURPOSE: The goal of the study was to examine the impact of a daily self-weighing weight-loss intervention on relevant psychological constructs. DESIGN: A 6-month RCT. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: The study sample (N=91) included overweight men and women in the Chapel Hill NC area. INTERVENTION: Between February and August 2011, participants were randomly assigned to a daily self-weighing intervention or delayed-intervention control group. The 6-month intervention included daily self-weighing for self-regulation of diet and exercise behaviors using an e-scale that transmitted weights to a study website. Weekly e-mailed lessons and tailored feedback on daily self-weighing adherence and weight-loss progress were provided. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-weighing frequency was measured throughout the study using e-scales. Weight was measured in-clinic at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months. Psychological outcomes were assessed via self-report at the same time points. RESULTS: In 2012, using linear mixed models and generalized estimating equation models, there were no significant differences between groups in depressive symptoms, anorectic cognitions, disinhibition, susceptibility to hunger, and binge eating. At 6 months, there was a significant group X time interaction for body dissatisfaction (p=0.007) and dietary restraint (p<0.001), with the intervention group reporting lower body dissatisfaction and greater dietary restraint compared to controls. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that a weight-loss intervention that focuses on daily self-weighing does not cause adverse psychological outcomes. This suggests that daily self-weighing is an effective and safe weight-control strategy among overweight adults attempting to lose weight. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov NCT01369004.
Authors: Jennifer A Linde; Robert W Jeffery; Emily A Finch; Gregory E Simon; Evette J Ludman; Belinda H Operskalski; Laura Ichikawa; Paul Rohde Journal: Prev Med Date: 2007-03-31 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Jeffrey J VanWormer; Anna M Martinez; Brian C Martinson; A L Crain; Gretchen A Benson; Daniel L Cosentino; Nicolaas P Pronk Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2008-10-31 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Dori M Steinberg; Deborah F Tate; Gary G Bennett; Susan Ennett; Carmen Samuel-Hodge; Dianne S Ward Journal: Obesity (Silver Spring) Date: 2013-07-02 Impact factor: 5.002
Authors: Carolyn T Bramante; Grace Lee; Safira S Amsili; Jennifer A Linde; Sean M Phelan; Lawrence J Appel; Wendy L Bennett; Jeanne M Clark; Kimberly A Gudzune Journal: Clin Obes Date: 2020-05-07
Authors: Yaguang Zheng; Susan M Sereika; Linda J Ewing; Cynthia A Danford; Martha Ann Terry; Lora E Burke Journal: J Acad Nutr Diet Date: 2015-12-25 Impact factor: 4.910
Authors: Rebecca A Krukowski; Delia West; Marisha DiCarlo; Kartik Shankar; Mario A Cleves; Eric Tedford; Aline Andres Journal: Matern Child Health J Date: 2017-03
Authors: Rebecca A Jones; Emma R Lawlor; Jack M Birch; Manal I Patel; André O Werneck; Erin Hoare; Simon J Griffin; Esther M F van Sluijs; Stephen J Sharp; Amy L Ahern Journal: Obes Rev Date: 2020-10-25 Impact factor: 9.213
Authors: Amy A Gorin; Jessica Gokee LaRose; Mark A Espeland; Deborah F Tate; Elissa Jelalian; Erica Robichaud; Pamela Coward; Karen E Hatley; Katelyn R Garcia; Wei Lang; Judy Bahnson; Cora E Lewis; Rena R Wing Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2018-12-13 Impact factor: 4.267