4.6 Article

Pounds Off Digitally Study A Randomized Podcasting Weight-Loss Intervention

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PREVENTIVE MEDICINE
Volume 37, Issue 4, Pages 263-269

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2009.06.010

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NIH [DK056350]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: As obesity rates rise, new weight-loss methods are needed. Little is known about the use of podcasting (audio files for a portable music player or computer) to promote weight loss, despite its growing popularity. Design: A 12-week RCT was conducted. Setting/participants: The study sample comprised overweight men and women (BMI=25-40 kg/m(2); n=78) in the Raleigh-Durham NC area. Intervention: In 2008, participants were randomly assigned to receive 24 episodes of a currently available weight-loss podcast (control podcast) or a weight-loss podcast based on social cognitive theory (SCT) designed by the researchers (enhanced podcast) for 12 weeks. Main outcome measures: Weight was measured on a digital scale at baseline and follow-up. Both groups also completed questionnaires assessing demographic information, food intake, physical activity, and SCT constructs at the introductory and 12-week meetings. Additional questionnaires at the 12-week meeting assessed perceptions of the intervention. Results: Data collection and analysis occurred in 2008 and intention-to-treat was used. Enhanced group participants (n=41) had a greater decrease in weight (-2.9+/-3.5 kg enhanced group vs -0.3+/-2.1 control group; p<0.001 between groups) and BMI (-1.0+/-1.2 kg/m(2) enhanced group vs -0.1+/-0.7 kg/m(2) control group; p<0.001 between groups) than the control group (n=37) and had greater weight-loss-related knowledge (p<0.05), elaboration (p<0.001), and user control (p<0.001) and less cognitive load (p<0.001). Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that the use of behavioral, theory-based podcasting may be an effective way to promote weight loss.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available