Evidence mapPaperPMID 39458528Full record

SynthesisNutrients2024

Is Fasting Superior to Continuous Caloric Restriction for Weight Loss and Metabolic Outcomes in Obese Adults? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

Víctor Siles-Guerrero, Jose M Romero-Márquez, Rosa Natalia García-Pérez, Cristina Novo-Rodríguez, Juan Manuel Guardia-Baena, María Hayón-Ponce, Carmen Tenorio-Jiménez, Martín López-de-la-Torre-Casares, Araceli Muñoz-Garach

Abstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Nutrients, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

9 authors.

Víctor Siles-GuerreroDepartment of Endocrinology and Nutrition, Virgen de las Nieves University Hospital, 18014 Granada, Spain.
Jose M Romero-MárquezDepartment of Endocrinology and Nutrition, Virgen de las Nieves University Hospital, 18014 Granada, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-7033-969X
Rosa Natalia García-PérezDepartment of Endocrinology and Nutrition, Virgen de las Nieves University Hospital, 18014 Granada, Spain.
Cristina Novo-RodríguezDepartment of Endocrinology and Nutrition, Virgen de las Nieves University Hospital, 18014 Granada, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-7765-6695
Juan Manuel Guardia-BaenaDepartment of Endocrinology and Nutrition, Virgen de las Nieves University Hospital, 18014 Granada, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-4413-9958
María Hayón-PonceDepartment of Endocrinology and Nutrition, Virgen de las Nieves University Hospital, 18014 Granada, Spain.
Carmen Tenorio-JiménezDepartment of Endocrinology and Nutrition, Virgen de las Nieves University Hospital, 18014 Granada, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-1773-6036
Martín López-de-la-Torre-CasaresDepartment of Endocrinology and Nutrition, Virgen de las Nieves University Hospital, 18014 Granada, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-1736-042X
Araceli Muñoz-GarachDepartment of Endocrinology and Nutrition, Virgen de las Nieves University Hospital, 18014 Granada, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundfasting-based strategies (FBS) and continuous caloric restriction (CCR) are popular methods for weight loss and improving metabolic health. FBS alternates between eating and fasting periods, while CCR reduces daily calorie intake consistently. Both aim to create a calorie deficit, but it is still uncertain as to which is more effective for short- and long-term weight and metabolic outcomes.

objectivesthis systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the effectiveness of FBS and CCR on these parameters in obese adults.

methodsafter screening 342 articles, 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 623 participants were included.

resultsboth interventions led to weight loss, with a reduction of 5.5 to 6.5 kg observed at the six-month mark. However, the results showed that FBS led to slightly greater short-term reductions in body weight (-0.94 kg,

conclusionsdespite these short-term benefits, FBS did not show superior long-term outcomes compared to CCR. Both strategies are effective for weight management, but more research is needed to explore the long-term clinical relevance of FBS in obese populations.

Indexed as

Caloric RestrictionFastingObesityWeight LossAdultBlood GlucoseHumansInsulin ResistanceRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeBlood Glucosecaloric deficitdaily caloric restrictionintermittent fastingobesitytime restricted fastingtime restricted feedingweight reduction

Identifiers

PMID39458528
PMCPMC11510157

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.