3.9 Article

Implications of the diabetes prevention program and look AHEAD clinical trials for lifestyle interventions

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN DIETETIC ASSOCIATION
卷 108, 期 4, 页码 S66-S72

出版社

AMER DIETETIC ASSOC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jada.2008.01.026

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIDDK NIH HHS [U01 DK057136-06, U01 DK057136-04S1, U01 DK057136-05, U01 DK057136-01, U01 DK057136-05S1, U01 DK057136-09S1, U01 DK057136-07, U01 DK057136-04, U01 DK057136-09, U01 DK057136-08S1, U01 DK057136-04S2, U01 DK057136-10, U01 DK057136-03, U01 DK057136-03S1, U01 DK057136-02, U01 DK057136-08, U01 DK057136] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Diabetes Prevention Program DPP) and Look AHEAD (Action for Health in Diabetes) trials are long-term randomized clinical trials that have the potential to direct diabetes care and medical nutrition therapy for obesity, prediabetes, and type 2 diabetes both now and in the future. This article summarizes and compares the important evidence-based results of these diabetes and obesity clinical trials and reviews the similarities and differences in lifestyle interventions that were designed for these trials. Although there were many similarities in the features of the DPP and Look AHEAD interventions, the Look AHEAD lifestyle intervention was more ambitious in several ways: higher individual weight-loss goals, lower calorie and fat-gram targets based on initial body weight, more intensive intervention frequency, combining closed group and individual session format, and use of more structured nutrition intervention strategies from the outset, including meal replacements, structured menus, and combined fat and calorie counting. Evidence, knowledge, and insights gained from working on these clinical trials will be very important in determining the strategies, methods, and approaches needed to make sure that the results of these trials will be fully applied in real-world practice settings for obesity, prediabetes, and type 2 diabetes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据