Weight loss maintenance: An agenda for health psychology

This is the peer reviewed version of the editorial, which has been published in final form at doi:10.1111/bjhp.12107. This editorial may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for self-archiving.n/a (Editorial)NIHR'Fuse' (British Heart Foundation, Cancer Research UK, ESRC, MRC

Prevalence of personal weight control attempts in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to estimate the prevalence of personal weight control attempts (weight loss and/or maintenance) worldwide and to identify correlates, personal strategies used and the underlying motives. We included epidemiological/observational studies of adults (≥18 years) reporting prevalence of weight control attempts in the past-year. Seventy-two studies (n = 1,184,942) met eligibility criteria. Results from high quality studies showed that 42% of adults from general populations and 44% of adults from ethnic-minority populations reported trying to lose weight, and 23% of adults from general populations reported trying to maintain weight annually. In general population studies, higher prevalence of weight loss attempts was observed in the decade of 2000–2009 (48.2%), in Europe/Central Asia (61.3%) and in overweight/obese individuals and in women (p < 0.01). Of the 37 strategies (grouped in 10 domains of the Oxford Food and Activity Behaviours Taxonomy) and 12 motives reported for trying to control weight, exercising and dieting (within the energy compensation and restraint domains, respectively) and wellbeing and long-term health were the most prevalent. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review to investigate weight control attempts worldwide. Key strategies and motives were identified which have implications for future public health initiatives on weight control

Furthering Scientific Inquiry for Weight Loss Maintenance: Assessing the Psychological Processes Impacted by a Low intensity Technology-Assisted Intervention (NULevel Trial)

\ua9 The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society of Behavioral Medicine.Background NULevel was a randomized control trial to evaluate a technology-assisted weight loss maintenance (WLM) program in the UK. The program included: (a) a face-to-face goal-setting session; (b) an internet platform, a pedometer, and wirelessly connected scales to monitor and report diet, physical activity, and weight, and; (c) regular automated feedback delivered by mobile phone, tailored to participants’ progress. Components were designed to target psychological processes linked to weight-related behavior. Though intervention participants showed increased physical activity, there was no difference in WLM between the intervention and control groups after 12 months (Sniehotta FF, Evans EH, Sainsbury K, et al. Behavioural intervention for weight loss maintenance versus standard weight advice in adults with obesity: A randomized controlled trial in the UK (NULevelTrial). PLoS Med. 2019; 16(5):e1002793. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1002793). It is unclear whether the program failed to alter targeted psychological processes, or whether changes in these processes failed to influence WLM. Purpose We evaluate whether the program influenced 16 prespecified psychological processes (e.g., self-efficacy and automaticity toward diet and physical activity), and whether these processes (at 6 months) were associated with successful WLM (at 12 months). Methods 288 adults who had previously lost weight were randomized to the intervention or control groups.The control group received wireless scales and standard advice via newsletters. Assessments occurred in person at 0, 6, and 12 months. Results The intervention significantly altered 10 of the 16 psychological processes, compared with the control group. However, few processes were associated with WLM, leading to no significant indirect effects of the intervention via the processes on WLM. Conclusions Changes in targeted processes were insufficient to support WLM. Future efforts may more closely examine the sequence of effects between processes, behavior, and WLM

Acceptability of Financial Incentives for Health Behaviours: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

BACKGROUND: Healthy behaviours are important determinants of health and disease, but many people find it difficult to perform these behaviours. Systematic reviews support the use of personal financial incentives to encourage healthy behaviours. There is concern that financial incentives may be unacceptable to the public, those delivering services and policymakers, but this has been poorly studied. Without widespread acceptability, financial incentives are unlikely to be widely implemented. We sought to answer two questions: what are the relative preferences of UK adults for attributes of financial incentives for healthy behaviours? Do preferences vary according to the respondents' socio-demographic characteristics? METHODS: We conducted an online discrete choice experiment. Participants were adult members of a market research panel living in the UK selected using quota sampling. Preferences were examined for financial incentives for: smoking cessation, regular physical activity, attendance for vaccination, and attendance for screening. Attributes of interest (and their levels) were: type of incentive (none, cash, shopping vouchers or lottery tickets); value of incentive (a continuous variable); schedule of incentive (same value each week, or value increases as behaviour change is sustained); other information provided (none, written information, face-to-face discussion, or both); and recipients (all eligible individuals, people living in low-income households, or pregnant women). RESULTS: Cash or shopping voucher incentives were preferred as much as, or more than, no incentive in all cases. Lower value incentives and those offered to all eligible individuals were preferred. Preferences for additional information provided alongside incentives varied between behaviours. Younger participants and men were more likely to prefer incentives. There were no clear differences in preference according to educational attainment. CONCLUSIONS: Cash or shopping voucher-type financial incentives for healthy behaviours are not necessarily less acceptable than no incentives to UK adults.This work is produced under the terms of a Career Development Fellowship research training fellowship issued by the National Institute of Health Research to JA (grant number NIHR-CDF-2011-04-17; http://www.nihr.ac.uk/funding/fellowship-programme.htm). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, The National Institute for Health Research or the Department of Health. JA is currently funded in full by the Centre for Diet & Activity Research (CEDAR), and the FFS is funded in full by Fuse: the Centre for Translational Research in Public Health. CEDAR and Fuse are UKCRC Public Health Research Centres of Excellence (http://www.ukcrc.org/research-coordination/joint-funding-initiatives/public-health-research/). Funding for CEDAR (grant number MR/K023187/1) and Fuse (grant number MR/K02325X/1) from the British Heart Foundation, Cancer Research UK, Economic and Social Research Council, Medical Research Council, the National Institute for Health Research, under the auspices of the UK Clinical Research Collaboration, is gratefully acknowledged.This is the final version of the article. It first appeared from PLOS via http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.015740

The Gestational Obesity Weight Management: Implementation of National Guidelines (GLOWING) study: a pilot cluster randomised controlled trial

\ua9 The Author(s) 2024.Background: Pregnancy weight management interventions can improve maternal diet, physical activity, gestational weight gain, and postnatal weight retention. UK guidelines were published in 2010 but health professionals report multiple complex barriers to practice. GLOWING used social cognitive theory to address evidence-based barriers to midwives’ implementation of weight management guidelines into routine practice. This paper reports the pilot trial outcomes relating to feasibility and acceptability of intervention delivery and trial procedures. Methods: GLOWING was a multi-centre parallel-group pilot cluster RCT comparing the delivery of a behaviour change intervention for midwives (delivered as training workshops) with usual practice. The clusters were four NHS Trusts in Northeast England, randomised to intervention or control arms. Blinding of allocation was not possible due to the nature of the intervention. We aimed to deliver the intervention to all eligible midwives in the intervention arm, in groups of 6 midwives per workshop, and to pilot questionnaire data collection for a future definitive trial. Intervention arm midwives’ acceptability of GLOWING content and delivery was assessed using a mixed methods questionnaire, and pregnant women’s acceptability of trial procedures by interviews. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively and qualitative data thematically. Results: In intervention arm Trusts, 100% of eligible midwives (n = 67) were recruited to, and received, the intervention; however, not all workshops had the planned number of attendees (range 3–8). The consent rate amongst midwives randomised (n = 100) to complete questionnaires was 74% (n = 74) (95% CI 65%, 83%), and overall completion rate 89% (n = 66) (95% CI 82%, 96%). Follow-up response rate was 66% (n = 49) (95% CI 55%, 77%), with a marked difference between intervention (39%, n = 15) and control (94%, n = 34) groups potentially due to the volume of research activities. Overall, 64% (n = 47) (95% CI 53%, 75%) completed both baseline and follow-up questionnaires. Midwives viewed the intervention as acceptable and directly relevant to routine practice. The least popular components related to scripted role-plays. Pregnant women viewed the recruitment and trial processes to be acceptable. Conclusions: This rigorously conducted pilot study demonstrated feasibility intervention delivery and a high level of acceptability amongst participants. It has provided information required to refine the intervention and trial protocol, enhancing confidence that a definitive trial could be carried out. Trial registration: ISRCTN46869894; retrospectively registered 25th May 2016, www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN46869894

N-of-1 study of weight loss maintenance assessing predictors of physical activity, adherence to weight loss plan and weight change

OBJECTIVE: Behaviour change interventions are effective in supporting individuals to achieve clinically significant weight loss, but weight loss maintenance (WLM) is less often attained. This study examined predictive variables associated with WLM. DESIGN: N-of-1 study with daily ecological momentary assessment combined with objective measurement of weight and physical activity, collected with wireless devices (Fitbit™) for six months. Eight previously obese adults who had lost over 5% of their body weight in the past year took part. Data were analysed using time series methods. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Predictor variables were based on five theoretical themes: maintenance motives, self-regulation, personal resources, habits, and environmental influences. Dependent variables were: objectively estimated step count and weight, and self-reported WLM plan adherence. RESULTS: For all participants, daily fluctuations in self-reported adherence to their WLM plan were significantly associated with most of the explanatory variables, including maintenance motivation and satisfaction with outcomes, self-regulation, habit, and stable environment. Personal resources were not a consistent predictor of plan adherence. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to assess theoretical predictions of WLM within individuals. WLM is a dynamic process including the interplay of motivation, self-regulation, habit, resources, and perceptions of environmental context. Individuals maintaining their weight have unique psychological profiles which could be accounted for in interventions.Funding for Fuse and CEDAR from the British Heart Foundation, Cancer Research UK, Economic and Social Research Council, Medical Research Council, the National Institute for Health Research, and the Welcome Trust, under the auspices of the UK Clinical Research Collaboration, is gratefully acknowledged

Public understanding of COVID-19 antibody testing and test results: A qualitative study conducted in the U.K. early in the pandemic

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, antibody testing was proposed by several countries as a surveillance tool to monitor the spread of the virus and potentially to ease restrictions. In the UK, antibody testing originally formed the third pillar of the UK Government's COVID-19 testing programme and was thought to offer hope that those with a positive antibody test result could return to normal life. However, at that time scientists and the public had little understanding of the longevity of COVID-19 antibodies, and whether they provided immunity to reinfection or transmission of the virus. Objective: This paper explores the UK public's understanding of COVID-19 testing, perceived test accuracy, the meaning of a positive test result, willingness to adhere to restrictive measures in response to an antibody test result and how they expect other people to respond. Methods: On-line synchronous focus groups were conducted in April/May 2020 during the first wave of the pandemic and the most stringent period of the COVID-19 restrictive measures. Data were analysed thematically. Results: There was confusion in responses as to whether those with a positive or negative test should return to work and which restrictive measures would apply to them or their household members. Participants raised concerns about the wider public response to positive antibody test results and the adverse behavioural effects. There were worries that antibody tests could create a divided society particularly if those with a positive test result were given greater freedoms or chose to disregard the restrictive measures. Conclusion: Should these tests be offered more widely, information should be developed in consultation with the public to ensure clarity and address uncertainty about test results and subsequent behaviours