Executive Functioning, Depressive Symptoms, and Intervention Engagement in a Sample of Adolescents Enrolled in a Weight Management Program

Child and Adolescent Health Programs in Obesity and Depression: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Obesity and depression are public health issues of increasing concern worldwide. This study aims to evaluate programs that address obesity and their impact on depressive symptoms in children and adolescents. Obesity and depression share a bidirectional relationship, where each can serve as both a cause and a consequence of the other.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following PRISMA criteria, with the registration recorded under PROSPERO code (CRD42024550644). The selected publications report on intervention programs for obesity and depression in children and adolescents aged 6 to 18 years. The selection was from databases including PUBMED, SCOPUS, LILACS, COCHRANE, WOS, SciELO, and ScienceDirect, using PICOS criteria to define inclusion. ROB-2 and ROBINS-1 were applied to assess bias.

RESULTS

Out of 3376 articles reviewed, eight met the inclusion criteria, some including several programs. These programs varied in duration and type, demonstrating changes in reducing Body Mass Index (BMI) and depressive symptoms. However, evidence supporting the effectiveness of programs that address both conditions is limited, particularly in developing countries. Additionally, the results exhibit high heterogeneity due to the diversity of evaluation criteria and methodological approaches, highlighting considerable risks of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Intervention programs for obesity management show statistically significant effects on depressive symptoms, although there is heterogeneity in the designs for their standardization and long-term follow-up strategies; however, the evaluations consider DSM-5 and ICD-11 criteria, which contributes to homogeneity. It is vital to address these closely related issues from a multidimensional perspective, considering socio-emotional and psychological factors, and to promote early intervention to maximize effectiveness and enhance quality of life at various stages of development.

User Engagement With mHealth Interventions to Promote Treatment Adherence and Self-Management in People With Chronic Health Conditions: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

There are numerous mobile health (mHealth) interventions for treatment adherence and self-management; yet, little is known about user engagement or interaction with these technologies.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aimed to answer the following questions: (1) How is user engagement defined and measured in studies of mHealth interventions to promote adherence to prescribed medical or health regimens or self-management among people living with a health condition? (2) To what degree are patients engaging with these mHealth interventions? (3) What is the association between user engagement with mHealth interventions and adherence or self-management outcomes? (4) How often is user engagement a research end point?

METHODS

Scientific database (Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and CINAHL) search results (2016-2021) were screened for inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were extracted in a standardized electronic form. No risk-of-bias assessment was conducted because this review aimed to characterize user engagement measurement rather than certainty in primary study results. The results were synthesized descriptively and thematically.

RESULTS

A total of 292 studies were included for data extraction. The median number of participants per study was 77 (IQR 34-164). Most of the mHealth interventions were evaluated in nonrandomized studies (157/292, 53.8%), involved people with diabetes (51/292, 17.5%), targeted medication adherence (98/292, 33.6%), and comprised apps (220/292, 75.3%). The principal findings were as follows: (1) >60 unique terms were used to define user engagement; "use" (102/292, 34.9%) and "engagement" (94/292, 32.2%) were the most common; (2) a total of 11 distinct user engagement measurement approaches were identified; the use of objective user log-in data from an app or web portal (160/292, 54.8%) was the most common; (3) although engagement was inconsistently evaluated, most of the studies (99/195, 50.8%) reported >1 level of engagement due to the use of multiple measurement methods or analyses, decreased engagement across time (76/99, 77%), and results and conclusions suggesting that higher engagement was associated with positive adherence or self-management (60/103, 58.3%); and (4) user engagement was a research end point in only 19.2% (56/292) of the studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The results revealed major limitations in the literature reviewed, including significant variability in how user engagement is defined, a tendency to rely on user log-in data over other measurements, and critical gaps in how user engagement is evaluated (infrequently evaluated over time or in relation to adherence or self-management outcomes and rarely considered a research end point). Recommendations are outlined in response to our findings with the goal of improving research rigor in this area.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42022289693; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022289693.

Mobile health (m-health) smartphone interventions for adolescents and adults with overweight or obesity

BACKGROUND

Obesity is considered to be a risk factor for various diseases, and its incidence has tripled worldwide since 1975. In addition to potentially being at risk for adverse health outcomes, people with overweight or obesity are often stigmatised. Behaviour change interventions are increasingly delivered as mobile health (m-health) interventions, using smartphone apps and wearables. They are believed to support healthy behaviours at the individual level in a low-threshold manner.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of integrated smartphone applications for adolescents and adults with overweight or obesity.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and LILACS, as well as the trials registers ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform on 2 October 2023 (date of last search for all databases). We placed no restrictions on the language of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Participants were adolescents and adults with overweight or obesity. Eligible interventions were integrated smartphone apps using at least two behaviour change techniques. The intervention could target physical activity, cardiorespiratory fitness, weight loss, healthy diet, or self-efficacy. Comparators included no or minimal intervention (NMI), a different smartphone app, personal coaching, or usual care. Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials of any duration with a follow-up of at least three months.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodology and the RoB 2 tool. Important outcomes were physical activity, body mass index (BMI) and weight, health-related quality of life, self-efficacy, well-being, change in dietary behaviour, and adverse events. We focused on presenting studies with medium- (6 to < 12 months) and long-term (≥ 12 months) outcomes in our summary of findings table, following recommendations in the core outcome set for behavioural weight management interventions.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 18 studies with 2703 participants. Interventions lasted from 2 to 24 months. The mean BMI in adults ranged from 27 to 50, and the median BMI z-score in adolescents ranged from 2.2 to 2.5. Smartphone app versus no or minimal intervention Thirteen studies compared a smartphone app versus NMI in adults; no studies were available for adolescents. The comparator comprised minimal health advice, handouts, food diaries, smartphone apps unrelated to weight loss, and waiting list. Measures of physical activity: at 12 months' follow-up, a smartphone app compared to NMI probably reduces moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) slightly (mean difference (MD) -28.9 min/week (95% confidence interval (CI) -85.9 to 28; 1 study, 650 participants; moderate-certainty evidence)). We are very uncertain about the results of estimated energy expenditure and cardiorespiratory fitness at eight months' follow-up. A smartphone app compared with NMI probably results in little to no difference in changes in total activity time at 12 months' follow-up and leisure time physical activity at 24 months' follow-up. Anthropometric measures: a smartphone app compared with NMI may reduce BMI (MD of BMI change -2.6 kg/m2, 95% CI -6 to 0.8; 2 studies, 146 participants; very low-certainty evidence) at six to eight months' follow-up, but the evidence is very uncertain. At 12 months' follow-up, a smartphone app probably resulted in little to no difference in BMI change (MD -0.1 kg/m2, 95% CI -0.4 to 0.3; 1 study; 650 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). A smartphone app compared with NMI may result in little to no difference in body weight change (MD -2.5 kg, 95% CI -6.8 to 1.7; 3 studies, 1044 participants; low-certainty evidence) at 12 months' follow-up. At 24 months' follow-up, a smartphone app probably resulted in little to no difference in body weight change (MD 0.7 kg, 95% CI -1.2 to 2.6; 1 study, 245 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). A smartphone app compared with NMI may result in little to no difference in self-efficacy for a physical activity score at eight months' follow-up, but the results are very uncertain. A smartphone app probably results in little to no difference in quality of life and well-being at 12 months (moderate-certainty evidence) and in little to no difference in various measures used to inform dietary behaviour at 12 and 24 months' follow-up. We are very uncertain about adverse events, which were only reported narratively in two studies (very low-certainty evidence). Smartphone app versus another smartphone app Two studies compared different versions of the same app in adults, showing no or minimal differences in outcomes. One study in adults compared two different apps (calorie counting versus ketogenic diet) and suggested a slight reduction in body weight at six months in favour of the ketogenic diet app. No studies were available for adolescents. Smartphone app versus personal coaching Only one study compared a smartphone app with personal coaching in adults, presenting data at three months. Two studies compared these interventions in adolescents. A smartphone app resulted in little to no difference in BMI z-score compared to personal coaching at six months' follow-up (MD 0, 95% CI -0.2 to 0.2; 1 study; 107 participants). Smartphone app versus usual care Only one study compared an app with usual care in adults but only reported data at three months on participant satisfaction. No studies were available for adolescents. We identified 34 ongoing studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence is limited and does not demonstrate a clear benefit of smartphone applications as interventions for adolescents or adults with overweight or obesity. While the number of studies is growing, the evidence remains incomplete due to the high variability of the apps' features, content and components, which complicates direct comparisons and assessment of their effectiveness. Comparisons with either no or minimal intervention or personal coaching show minor effects, which are mostly not clinically significant. Minimal data for adolescents also warrants further research. Evidence is also scarce for low- and middle-income countries as well as for people with different socio-economic and cultural backgrounds. The 34 ongoing studies suggest sustained interest in the topic, with new evidence expected to emerge within the next two years. In practice, clinicians and healthcare practitioners should carefully consider the potential benefits, limitations, and evolving research when recommending smartphone apps to adolescents and adults with overweight or obesity.

An addiction-based digital weight loss intervention: A multi-centre randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

This randomized clinical trial tested the effectiveness of an addiction-based digital weight-loss intervention, focusing on withdrawal/abstinence from self-identified problem foods, snacking and excessive amounts at meals, and discomfort displacement, with and without coaching, compared to an in-person, multi-disciplinary, care model among adolescents with obesity. We hypothesized that the digital intervention with coaching would yield greater weight loss and lower delivery burden than the standard clinical arm, and greater participant engagement than the digital arm without coaching.

METHODS

Adolescents were randomized to app intervention, with or without coaching, or in-person multidisciplinary obesity intervention for 6 months. The primary outcome was change in %BMIp95 at weeks 12 and 24. A mixed-effects linear regression model was used to assess the association between change in %BMIp95 and intervention arm. We were also interested in assessing delivery burden, participant engagement and evaluating the relationships between weight change and demographic characteristics, mood, executive function and eating behaviours.

RESULTS

All adolescents (n = 161; BMI ≥95th%, age 16 ± 2.5 year; 47% Hispanic, 65% female, 59% publicly insured) lost weight over 24-weeks (-1.29%, [-1.82, -0.76], p < 0.0001), with no significant weight loss difference between groups (p = 0.3). Girls lost more weight than boys, whereas binge eating behaviour at baseline was associated with increase in %BMIp95 when controlling for other covariates. There was no association between ethnicity, mood, timing of intervention in relation to the pandemic, or executive function and change in %BMIp95 .

CONCLUSIONS

Contrary with our hypothesis, our results showed no difference in the change in BMI status between treatment arms. Since efficacy of this digital intervention was not inferior to in-person, multi-disciplinary care, this could offer a reasonable weight management option for clinicians, based on youth and family specific characteristics, such as accessibility, resources, and communication styles.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT035008353.