ArticleInternational journal of obesity (2005)2026
Post-intervention sustainability of time-restricted eating versus caloric restriction: a secondary analysis.
Article in International journal of obesity (2005), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04259632 (Prolonged Daily Fasting as a Viable Alternative to Caloric Restriction in At-Risk Obese Humans), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Prolonged Daily Fasting as a Viable Alternative to Caloric Restriction in At-Risk Obese Humans
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Rising obesity rates necessitate sustainable weight management strategies. Current lifestyle guidelines focus on reducing caloric intake through personalized interventions to promote compliance. This secondary analysis evaluated post-intervention sustainability of time-restricted eating (TRE) versus caloric restriction (CR), hypothesizing that TRE's "watching the clock" approach may be more sustainable than CR's "watching calories." Following a 12-week supervised intervention (TRE: 8-h eating window, n = 29; CR: 15% caloric reduction, n = 26), 41 participants (75%; 24 F/17 M; 23 TRE/18 CR; age 43.1 ± 11.6 years; BMI 34.7 ± 5.4 kg/m²) completed follow-up surveys at 1, 3, and 6 months. TRE participants maintained weight across all follow-ups compared to final intervention weight. CR participants showed significant loss at 1 month (-1.6 ± 2.5 kg, p = 0.02), returning to baseline by 3 months. Both interventions had similar continuation rates (1,3,6 months: TRE: 52%, 36%, 47%; CR: 63%, 57%, 50%; p = 0.60) and recommendation rates (TRE: 81%, 85%, 86%; CR: 88%, 86%, 80%; p = 0.72). TRE participants reported improved sleep, energy, and digestion but experienced morning hunger and scheduling challenges. CR participants noted increased food mindfulness but reported tracking anxiety, cravings, and potential binge eating. Despite limitations including small sample size and self-reported weight, both self-sustained TRE and CR showed similar acceptability and weight maintenance at 3-6 months post-intervention. Clinical Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04259632.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.