↓ Skip to main content

Third-wave cognitive behaviour therapies for weight management: systematic review and network meta-analysis protocol

Overview of attention for article published in BMJ Open, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
16 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Third-wave cognitive behaviour therapies for weight management: systematic review and network meta-analysis protocol
Published in
BMJ Open, August 2018
DOI 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023425
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emma R Lawlor, Nazrul Islam, Simon J Griffin, Andrew J Hill, Carly A Hughes, Amy L Ahern

Abstract

Behavioural and cognitive behavioural programmes are commonly used to assist with weight management, but there is considerable scope to improve their effectiveness, particularly in the longer term. Third-wave cognitive behaviour therapies (CBTs) have this potential and are increasingly used. This systematic review will assess the effect of third-wave CBTs for weight management on weight, psychological and physical health outcomes in adults with overweight or obesity. The systematic review will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidance. We will include studies of any third-wave CBTs focusing on weight loss or weight maintenance for adults with a body mass index (BMI) ≥25kg/m2. Eligible study designs will be randomised control trials, non-randomised trials, prospective cohort and case series. Outcomes of interest will be body weight/BMI, psychological and physical health, and adherence. We will search the following databases from inception to 16 January 2018: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane database (CENTRAL), PsycINFO, AMED, ASSIA and Web of Science. The search strategy will be based on the concepts: (1) third-wave CBTs and (2) overweight, obesity or weight management. No restrictions will be applied. We will search reference lists of relevant reviews and included articles. Two independent reviewers will screen articles for eligibility using a two-stage process. Two independent reviewers will extract data, assess risk of bias using Risk of Bias 2.0, Risk of Bias in Non-randomised studies of Interventions or Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies of Exposures checklist and assess quality using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation tool. A random-effects network meta-analysis of outcomes, and sub-group analyses and meta-regression will be conducted, where data permit. If not appropriate, a narrative synthesis will be undertaken. Ethical approval is not required as no primary data will be collected. The completed systematic review will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal, presented at conferences and used to inform the development of a weight management programme. CRD42018088255.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 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 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 5 25%
Student > Master 4 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 15%
Researcher 2 10%
Librarian 2 10%
Other 4 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 7 35%
Unspecified 4 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 10%
Computer Science 1 5%
Other 3 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 14 September 2019.
All research outputs
#1,892,225
of 13,622,686 outputs
Outputs from BMJ Open
#3,688
of 12,159 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,793
of 268,506 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMJ Open
#134
of 547 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,622,686 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,159 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 268,506 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 547 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.