| Title |
Breaking bad habits by improving executive function in individuals with obesity
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12889-018-5392-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Vanessa Allom, Barbara Mullan, Evelyn Smith, Phillipa Hay, Jayanthi Raman |
| Abstract |
Two primary factors that contribute to obesity are unhealthy eating and sedentary behavior. These behaviors are particularly difficult to change in the long-term because they are often enacted habitually. Cognitive Remediation Therapy has been modified and applied to the treatment of obesity (CRT-O) with preliminary results of a randomized controlled trial demonstrating significant weight loss and improvements in executive function. The objective of this study was to conduct a secondary data analysis of the CRT-O trial to evaluate whether CRT-O reduces unhealthy habits that contribute to obesity via improvements in executive function. Eighty participants with obesity were randomized to CRT-O or control. Measures of executive function (Wisconsin Card Sort Task and Trail Making Task) and unhealthy eating and sedentary behavior habits were administered at baseline, post-intervention and at 3 month follow-up. Participants receiving CRT-O demonstrated improvements in both measures of executive function and reductions in both unhealthy habit outcomes compared to control. Mediation analyses revealed that change in one element of executive function performance (Wisconsin Card Sort Task perseverance errors) mediated the effect of CRT-O on changes in both habit outcomes. These results suggest that the effectiveness of CRT-O may result from the disruption of unhealthy habits made possible by improvements in executive function. In particular, it appears that cognitive flexibility, as measured by the Wisconsin Card Sort task, is a key mechanism in this process. Improving cognitive flexibility may enable individuals to capitalise on interruptions in unhealthy habits by adjusting their behavior in line with their weight loss goals rather than persisting with an unhealthy choice. The RCT was registered with the Australian New Zealand Registry of Clinical Trials (trial id: ACTRN12613000537752 ). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 7 | 88% |
| Unknown | 1 | 13% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 63% |
| Scientists | 2 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 204 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 204 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 34 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 22 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 6% |
| Researcher | 8 | 4% |
| Other | 30 | 15% |
| Unknown | 83 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 30 | 15% |
| Psychology | 25 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 6% |
| Sports and Recreations | 9 | 4% |
| Neuroscience | 7 | 3% |
| Other | 23 | 11% |
| Unknown | 98 | 48% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 March 2024.
All research outputs
#1,519,371
of 25,492,047 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#1,733
of 17,637 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,051
of 324,469 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#42
of 316 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,492,047 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,637 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 324,469 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 316 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.