↓ Skip to main content

Effect of Wearable Technology Combined With a Lifestyle Intervention on Long-term Weight Loss: The IDEA Randomized Clinical Trial

Overview of attention for article published in JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#3 of 20,761)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Readers on

mendeley
172 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
Title
Effect of Wearable Technology Combined With a Lifestyle Intervention on Long-term Weight Loss: The IDEA Randomized Clinical Trial
Published in
JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, September 2016
DOI 10.1001/jama.2016.12858
Pubmed ID
Authors

John M. Jakicic, Kelliann K. Davis, Renee J. Rogers, Wendy C. King, Marsha D. Marcus, Diane Helsel, Amy D. Rickman, Abdus S. Wahed, Steven H. Belle, Jakicic, John M, Davis, Kelliann K, Rogers, Renee J, King, Wendy C, Marcus, Marsha D, Helsel, Diane, Rickman, Amy D, Wahed, Abdus S, Belle, Steven H, Jakicic JM, Davis KK, Rogers RJ, King WC, Marcus MD, Helsel D, Rickman AD, Wahed AS, Belle SH

Abstract

Effective long-term treatments are needed to address the obesity epidemic. Numerous wearable technologies specific to physical activity and diet are available, but it is unclear if these are effective at improving weight loss. To test the hypothesis that, compared with a standard behavioral weight loss intervention (standard intervention), a technology-enhanced weight loss intervention (enhanced intervention) would result in greater weight loss. Randomized clinical trial conducted at the University of Pittsburgh and enrolling 471 adult participants between October 2010 and October 2012, with data collection completed by December 2014. Participants were placed on a low-calorie diet, prescribed increases in physical activity, and had group counseling sessions. At 6 months, the interventions added telephone counseling sessions, text message prompts, and access to study materials on a website. At 6 months, participants randomized to the standard intervention group initiated self-monitoring of diet and physical activity using a website, and those randomized to the enhanced intervention group were provided with a wearable device and accompanying web interface to monitor diet and physical activity. The primary outcome of weight was measured over 24 months at 6-month intervals, and the primary hypothesis tested the change in weight between 2 groups at 24 months. Secondary outcomes included body composition, fitness, physical activity, and dietary intake. Among the 471 participants randomized (body mass index [BMI], 25 to <40; age range, 18-35 years; 28.9% nonwhite, 77.2% women), 470 (233 in the standard intervention group, 237 in the enhanced intervention group) initiated the interventions as randomized, and 74.5% completed the study. For the enhanced intervention group, mean baseline weight was 96.3 kg (95% CI, 94.2-98.5) and 24-month weight 89.3 kg (95% CI, 87.1-91.5). For the standard intervention group, mean baseline weight was 95.2 kg (95% CI, 93.0-97.3) and 24-month weight was 92.8 kg (95% CI, 90.6-95.0). Weight change at 24 months differed significantly by intervention group (estimated mean weight loss, 3.5 kg [95% CI, 2.6-4.5} in the enhanced intervention group and 5.9 kg [95% CI, 5.0-6.8] in the standard intervention group; difference, 2.4 kg [95% CI, 1.0-3.7]; P = .002). Both groups had significant improvements in body composition, fitness, physical activity, and diet, with no significant difference between groups. Among young adults with a BMI between 25 and less than 40, the addition of a wearable technology device to a standard behavioral intervention resulted in less weight loss over 24 months. Devices that monitor and provide feedback on physical activity may not offer an advantage over standard behavioral weight loss approaches. clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01131871.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 1,276 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 172 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 5 3%
United States 5 3%
Switzerland 3 2%
Germany 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Other 2 1%
Unknown 151 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 20%
Researcher 31 18%
Student > Master 26 15%
Student > Bachelor 18 10%
Other 15 9%
Other 48 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 62 36%
Psychology 16 9%
Social Sciences 16 9%
Computer Science 14 8%
Sports and Recreations 11 6%
Other 53 31%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3831. 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 08 November 2017.
All research outputs
#51
of 8,648,615 outputs
Outputs from JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association
#3
of 20,761 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2
of 255,368 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association
#1
of 425 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,648,615 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,761 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 255,368 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 425 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.