ArticleEpigenomes2026
Epigenetic Age Feedback as a Catalyst for Sustained Lifestyle Change: One-Year Results from the EU iHelp Study.
Article in Epigenomes, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSustaining long-term lifestyle change remains a major challenge in preventive health. Epigenetic clocks offer a dynamic, modifiable measure of biological ageing that may enhance motivation when returned to individuals.
objectivesThis study had two aims: (1) to evaluate whether personalised health reports integrating epigenetic age, polygenic cancer risk scores, and lifestyle metrics could motivate sustained behavioural change; and (2) to examine variability across epigenetic clock generations to inform the selection of a suitable model for participant feedback.
methodsA total of 178 adults were recruited via the Graham Fulford Charitable Trust community testing programme, and 91 completed a one-year follow-up survey assessing behavioural, psychological, and knowledge-related outcomes. DNA methylation data from 140 samples were used to compare 14 epigenetic clocks across four generations.
resultsMost participants reported positive lifestyle changes, including feeling healthier (72.5%), increased physical activity (60.4%), and improved diet (47.3%). Gains were also observed in health knowledge (63.7%) and psychological well-being (31.9%). Epigenetic clock comparisons revealed substantial heterogeneity across models. Zhang2019-BLUP was selected as a stable and interpretable measure of biological age that can be readily communicated to participants, supporting empowerment and improved health literacy, rather than serving only as a risk prediction metric.
conclusionsPersonalised biomarker feedback including epigenetic age combined with lifestyle and wearable data can support self-reported improvements in health-related behaviours. Community-based delivery through trusted local networks proved effective. The marked variation between epigenetic clocks highlights the importance of selecting models designed for clear communication when used in public-facing health interventions.
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.