↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Weight-loss intervention adherence and factors promoting adherence: a meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Patient preference and adherence, August 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 (#10 of 1,768)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
21 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
23 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages
video
4 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
240 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
395 Mendeley
Title
Weight-loss intervention adherence and factors promoting adherence: a meta-analysis
Published in
Patient preference and adherence, August 2016
DOI 10.2147/ppa.s103649
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mark Lemstra, Yelena Bird, Chijioke Nwankwo, Marla Rogers, John Moraros

Abstract

Adhering to weight loss interventions is difficult for many people. The majority of those who are overweight or obese and attempt to lose weight are simply not successful. The objectives of this study were 1) to quantify overall adherence rates for various weight loss interventions and 2) to provide pooled estimates for factors associated with improved adherence to weight loss interventions. We performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of all studies published between January 2004 and August 2015 that reviewed weight loss intervention adherence. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria and checking the methodological quality, 27 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The overall adherence rate was 60.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 53.6-67.2). The following three main variables were found to impact adherence: 1) supervised attendance programs had higher adherence rates than those with no supervision (rate ratio [RR] 1.65; 95% CI 1.54-1.77); 2) interventions that offered social support had higher adherence than those without social support (RR 1.29; 95% CI 1.24-1.34); and 3) dietary intervention alone had higher adherence than exercise programs alone (RR 1.27; 95% CI 1.19-1.35). A substantial proportion of people do not adhere to weight loss interventions. Programs supervising attendance, offering social support, and focusing on dietary modification have better adherence than interventions not supervising attendance, not offering social support, and focusing exclusively on exercise.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 395 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ecuador 1 <1%
Unknown 394 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 65 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 61 15%
Student > Master 48 12%
Researcher 30 8%
Student > Postgraduate 17 4%
Other 50 13%
Unknown 124 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 64 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 53 13%
Psychology 31 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 23 6%
Sports and Recreations 20 5%
Other 68 17%
Unknown 136 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 192. 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 05 March 2023.
All research outputs
#209,643
of 25,593,129 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#10
of 1,768 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,197
of 381,702 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#3
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,593,129 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 1,768 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. 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 381,702 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 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 96% of its contemporaries.