The Effect of Intervention Preference Matching on Outcomes and Engagement in a Post-cessation Weight Management Trial

PurposeThis study examined the effect of intervention treatment preference in a post-smoking cessation weight management trial.Design & SettingParticipants were randomized to a weight management intervention (Stability, Loss, or Bibliotherapy); all participants received a standard smoking cessation program. Adults aged 18+ were recruited from Memphis, TN, and nationally.ParticipantsIndividuals were eligible if they had a BMI of 22 kg/m<sup>2</sup> or greater.MeasuresParticipants were asked about their preferred weight intervention at screening. Weight change and self-reported point-prevalence abstinence were assessed (Month 12). Participants rated perceived effectiveness, difficulty (screening, Month 2), and intervention satisfaction (Month 12).AnalysisWe examined the effect of intervention preference match on 12-month weight change, smoking cessation, perceived effectiveness, difficulty, and satisfaction.ResultsParticipants (n = 305) were majority female (68%); white (52%); and had overweight/obesity (87%). At screening, most participants perceived the Loss intervention as most effective; at Month 2, Stability was perceived as most effective. The Stability intervention was perceived as easiest at screening and Month 2. Those who were matched to their treatment preference had greater 12-month weight loss, but similar rates of smoking cessation.ConclusionsParticipants who were matched to their preference were more successful in preventing post-cessation weight gain, compared to those who were not matched. Future research should systematically test intervention preference effects with the aim of precision health.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
American Journal of Health Promotion
Published
2024-12-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/08901171241307429
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Obesity and Health Practices
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.94

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Effect of Intervention Preference Matching on Outcomes and Engagement in a Post-cessation Weight Management Trial

Jamie Zoellner, Erin M. Solomon, Kelsey R. Day, Zoran Bursac et al.
1 citations
American Journal of Health Promotion
Obesity and Health Practices
0.94
article

The Effect of Intervention Preference Matching on Outcomes and Engagement in a Post-cessation Weight Management Trial

Jamie Zoellner, Erin M. Solomon, Kelsey R. Day, Zoran Bursac, Rebecca A. Krukowski
article en
1 citations

Abstract

PurposeThis study examined the effect of intervention treatment preference in a post-smoking cessation weight management trial.Design & SettingParticipants were randomized to a weight management intervention (Stability, Loss, or Bibliotherapy); all participants received a standard smoking cessation program. Adults aged 18+ were recruited from Memphis, TN, and nationally.ParticipantsIndividuals were eligible if they had a BMI of 22 kg/m<sup>2</sup> or greater.MeasuresParticipants were asked about their preferred weight intervention at screening. Weight change and self-reported point-prevalence abstinence were assessed (Month 12). Participants rated perceived effectiveness, difficulty (screening, Month 2), and intervention satisfaction (Month 12).AnalysisWe examined the effect of intervention preference match on 12-month weight change, smoking cessation, perceived effectiveness, difficulty, and satisfaction.ResultsParticipants (n = 305) were majority female (68%); white (52%); and had overweight/obesity (87%). At screening, most participants perceived the Loss intervention as most effective; at Month 2, Stability was perceived as most effective. The Stability intervention was perceived as easiest at screening and Month 2. Those who were matched to their treatment preference had greater 12-month weight loss, but similar rates of smoking cessation.ConclusionsParticipants who were matched to their preference were more successful in preventing post-cessation weight gain, compared to those who were not matched. Future research should systematically test intervention preference effects with the aim of precision health.

American Journal of Health PromotionVol. 39(4)
Florida International University (US), University of Virginia (US), University of Memphis (US)
Health Science Center, University of Tennessee, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 18%
Obesity and Health Practices
0.94
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.