4.7 Article

Keyto app and device versus WW app on weight loss and metabolic risk in adults with overweight or obesity: A randomized trial

期刊

OBESITY
卷 29, 期 10, 页码 1606-1614

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/oby.23242

关键词

-

资金

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research [MSH-141980]
  2. Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research (MSFHR) [16890]
  3. Mitacs [IT15608]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study found that among adults with overweight/obesity, a Mediterranean-style ketogenic diet app with breath acetone biofeedback was more effective in promoting weight loss compared to a calorie-restricted, low-fat diet app. Additionally, markers such as hemoglobin A1c and liver enzymes showed greater improvement in the ketogenic diet group.
Objective The aim of this study was to determine whether a Mediterranean-style, ketogenic diet mobile health application (app) with breath acetone biofeedback is superior to a calorie-restricted, low-fat diet app in promoting weight loss. Methods Participants (n = 155) with overweight/obesity (mean [SD]: age 41 [11] years, BMI = 34 [5] kg/m(2), 71% female) were randomized to one of the interventions delivered entirely via app. Participants received a wireless scale and were instructed to take daily weight measurements. A third-party laboratory collected blood samples at baseline and 12 weeks. Results Weight loss at 12 weeks was greater in the ketogenic (-5.6 kg; 95% CI: -6.7 kg to -4.5 kg) compared with the low-fat group (-2.5 kg; 95% CI: -3.6 kg to -1.4 kg) (between-group difference: -3.1 kg; 95% CI: -4.6 kg to -1.5 kg; p < 0.001). Weight loss at 24 weeks indicated durability of the effect (between-group difference: -5.5 kg; 95% CI: -8.3 kg to -2.8 kg; p < 0.001). Secondary/exploratory outcomes of hemoglobin A1c and liver enzymes were improved to a greater extent in the ketogenic diet group (p < 0.01). Conclusions Among adults with overweight/obesity, a ketogenic diet app with breath acetone biofeedback was superior to a calorie-restricted diet app at promoting weight loss in a real-world setting.

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

4.7
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