Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34591256›Full record

ReviewCurrent obesity reports2021

Neural Vulnerability Factors That Predict Future Weight Gain.

Eric Stice, Sonja Yokum

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current obesity reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Structural and Functional Brain Changes in Children and Adolescents With Obesity.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2025
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Separating desire from prediction of outcome value.Trends in cognitive sciences · 2023
    Review
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Eric SticeDepartment of Psychiatry, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA. estice@stanford.edu.
Sonja YokumOregon Research Institute, Eugene, OR, 97403, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThe current article discusses five neural vulnerability theories for weight gain and reviews evidence from prospective studies using imaging and behavioral measures reflecting neural function, as well as randomized experiments with humans and animals that are consistent or inconsistent with these theories. RECENT

findingsRecent prospective imaging studies examining predictors of weight gain and response to obesity treatment, and repeated-measures imaging studies before and after weight gain and loss have advanced knowledge of etiologic processes and neural plasticity resulting from weight change. Overall, data provide strong support for the incentive sensitization theory of obesity and moderate support for the reward surfeit theory, inhibitory control deficit theory, and dynamic vulnerability model of obesity, which attempted to synthesize the former theories into a single etiologic model. Data provide little support for the reward deficit theory. Important directions for future studies are delineated.

Indexed as

ObesityWeight GainAnimalsBrainHumansProspective StudiesRewardRisk FactorsfMRIObesityProspectiveReward circuitryWeight gain

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.