The Effects of Time-Restricted Eating versus Standard Dietary Advice on Weight, Metabolic Health and the Consumption of Processed Food: A Pragmatic Randomised Controlled Trial in Community-Based Adults
Phillips NE, Mareschal J, Schwab N, Manoogian ENC, Borloz S, Ostinelli G, Gauthier-Jaques A, Umwali S, Gonzalez Rodriguez E, Aeberli D, Hans D, Panda S, Rodondi N, Naef F, Collet TH
Nutrients · 96 citations
How it was studied
- Design
- Randomized controlled trial (indexed by PubMed)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Health markers and function
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Independent funding
- Government
- Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
- Nonprofit
- Fondation Leenaards
- Nonprofit
- Schweizerische Multiple Sklerose Gesellschaft
- Nonprofit
- Vontobel-Stiftung
- Nonprofit
- Schweizerischen Gesellschaft für Endokrinologie und Diabetologie
- Government
- Swiss National Science Foundation
- Grants
- Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung (167826)
Based on 6 listed funder(s) and full-text disclosure statement.
Publication
- Published
- 2021-03-23 · Nutrients · vol. 13 · issue 3 · p. 1042
- Publisher
- Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute
- Cited
- 106 citations · more than 99% of similar papers · 8.2× the field average
- Impact
- Top 10% most cited in its field
- References
- 45 works
- Access
- Open access (journal) · CC-BY
- Research areas
- Dietary Effects on Health · Diet and metabolism studies · Eating Disorders and Behaviors
- Keywords
- Consumption (sociology), Medicine, Healthy eating, Randomized controlled trial, Environmental health, Gerontology, Food science, Physical therapy, Biology, Physical activity, Internal medicine
- MeSH
- humans, obesity, body weight, weight loss, exercise, nutrition therapy, diet therapy, diet, body composition, eating, time factors, adolescent, adult, aged, middle aged, female, male, young adult, fast foods, smartphone, metabolic syndrome
15 authors
From CH, US, CA
- Nicholas Edward PhillipsÉcole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
- Julie Mareschal
- Nathalie SchwabUniversity of Bern; University Hospital of Bern; University of Lausanne
- Emily N. C. ManoogianSalk Institute for Biological Studies
- Sylvie BorlozUniversity of Lausanne
- Giada OstinelliInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec; Université Laval; University of Lausanne
Abstract
Weight loss is key to controlling the increasing prevalence of metabolic syndrome (MS) and its components, i.e., central obesity, hypertension, prediabetes and dyslipidaemia. The goals of our study were two-fold. First, we characterised the relationships between eating duration, unprocessed and processed food consumption and metabolic health. During 4 weeks of observation, 213 adults used a smartphone application to record food and drink consumption, which was annotated for food processing levels following the NOVA classification. Low consumption of unprocessed food and low physical activity showed significant associations with multiple MS components. Second, in a pragmatic randomised controlled trial, we compared the metabolic benefits of 12 h time-restricted eating (TRE) to standard dietary advice (SDA) in 54 adults with an eating duration > 14 h and at least one MS component. After 6 months, those randomised to TRE lost 1.6% of initial body weight (SD 2.9, p = 0.01), compared to the absence of weight loss with SDA (-1.1%, SD 3.5, p = 0.19). There was no significant difference in weight loss between TRE and SDA (between-group difference -0.88%, 95% confidence interval -3.1 to 1.3, p = 0.43). Our results show the potential of smartphone records to predict metabolic health and highlight that further research is needed to improve individual responses to TRE such as a shorter eating window or its actual clock time.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher (CC BY).
Community trust
Loading…
How much do you trust this study's findings?
Comments
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inSomething wrong here?
Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inEducational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.