Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40124957›Full record

ArticleObesity science & practice2025

An Acceptance-Based Guided Self-Help Program for Weight Loss Maintenance in Adults Who Have Previously Completed a Behavioral Weight Loss Program: The SWiM Feasibility Study.

Rebecca A Jones, Julia Mueller, Rebecca Richards, Jennifer Woolston, Marie Stubbings, Fiona Whittle, Andrew J Hill, Carly A Hughes, Robbie Duschinsky, Stephen J Sharp and 14 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Obesity science & practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

24 authors.

Rebecca A JonesMRC Epidemiology Unit University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2197-1175
Julia MuellerMRC Epidemiology Unit University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4939-7112
Rebecca RichardsMRC Epidemiology Unit University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7122-6822
Jennifer WoolstonMRC Epidemiology Unit University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0127-2898
Marie StubbingsMRC Epidemiology Unit University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6442-8127
Fiona WhittleMRC Epidemiology Unit University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5461-521X
Andrew J HillDivision of Psychological and Social Medicine School of Medicine University of Leeds Leeds UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3192-0427
Carly A HughesMRC Epidemiology Unit University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9560-7873
Robbie DuschinskyPrimary Care Unit Department of Public Health and Primary Care University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2023-5328
Stephen J SharpMRC Epidemiology Unit University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2375-1440
Michelle ChesterMRC Epidemiology Unit University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-6132-2134
Carlotta SchwertelMRC Epidemiology Unit University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.
Struan TaitMRC Epidemiology Unit University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-3935-9295
Patricia Eustachio ColomboMRC Epidemiology Unit University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8505-116X
Laura KudlekMRC Epidemiology Unit University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0947-3640
Clare E BoothbyMRC Epidemiology Unit University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9396-8333
Jennifer BostockPublic Involvement Lead, Quality Safety Outcomes Policy Research Unit University of Kent Oxford and Leeds Kent UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9261-9350
Penny BreezeSheffield Centre for Health and Related Research (SCHARR), School of Medicine and Population Health University of Sheffield Sheffield UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4189-8676
Alan BrennanSheffield Centre for Health and Related Research (SCHARR), School of Medicine and Population Health University of Sheffield Sheffield UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1025-312X
Francesco FuscoPrimary Care Unit Department of Public Health and Primary Care University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5515-3977
Emma R LawlorMRC Epidemiology Unit University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0742-0476
Stephen MorrisPrimary Care Unit Department of Public Health and Primary Care University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5828-3563
Simon J GriffinMRC Epidemiology Unit University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2157-4797
Amy L AhernMRC Epidemiology Unit University of Cambridge Cambridge UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5069-4758

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Most weight lost during weight-loss programmes is eventually regained. Interventions based on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) demonstrate good evidence for long-term weight loss, but are often costly and difficult to scale up. Guided self-help programmes delivered using technology and non-specialist coaches could increase scalability, but it is unclear whether delivering ACT-based interventions in this way is feasible and acceptable. Methods: In this feasibility study, 61 people who recently completed a behavioral weight management intervention (BWMI) for weight management were randomly allocated to SWiM ("Supporting Weight Management": 4-month digital guided self-help ACT-based intervention for weight loss maintenance) or a standard care group (leaflet about maintaining weight loss) using a 2:1 allocation ratio. At baseline and 6 months, participants completed measures of weight, mental health, eating behavior, and other psychosocial variables. Participants completed an intervention evaluation questionnaire. At 3 and 6 months, qualitative interviews were conducted with participants from both trial arms and SWiM coaches. The analysis integrated statistics and thematic analysis, informed by the Medical Research Council (MRC) framework for process evaluations. Since this was a feasibility study, analyses focused on process outcomes instead of interpreting statistical significance. Results: Eighty-eight percent (36/41) of participants allocated to SWiM completed at least the first session and 22 (54%) completed all sessions. At 6 months, mean weight change was -2.2 (+/-6.4 SD) kg in SWiM participants and +2.2 (+/-6.6) kg in standard care participants. Descriptively, eating behavior and mental health scores improved in SWiM participants but not in standard care participants. In interviews, SWiM participants noted that they reinforced their existing knowledge while acquiring new skills and strategies, which were felt to contribute to positive behavioral changes. Conclusion: The SWiM intervention is practical and well-received, and shows promise in supporting weight loss maintenance, though evaluation in a larger trial is needed to assess effectiveness. Trial Registration: ISRCTN12685964.

Indexed as

acceptance and commitment therapydigitalinterventionsobesityoverweightweight loss maintenanceweight management

Identifiers

PMID40124957
PMCPMC11929140

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.