Early time-restricted eating compared with daily caloric restriction: A randomized trial in adults with obesity
Thomas EA, Zaman A, Sloggett KJ, Steinke S, Grau L, Catenacci VA, Cornier MA, Rynders CA
Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.) · 76 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
- Nonprofit
- Doris Duke Charitable Foundation
- Government
- National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
- Government
- National Center for Research Resources
- Government
- National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
- Government
- NIDDK NIH HHS
- Government
- NCRR NIH HHS
- Government
- NCATS NIH HHS
- Grants
- National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (P30 DK048520); National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (KL2TR002534); National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (R21DK117499); National Center for Research Resources (#UL1 RR025780); Doris Duke Charitable Foundation (2015212); National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (F32 DK123878); National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (K01 DK113063)
Based on 7 listed funder(s).
Publication
- Published
- 2022-04-26 · Obesity (Silver Spring) · vol. 30 · issue 5 · pp. 1027–1038
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Cited
- 92 citations · more than 99% of similar papers · 8.8× the field average
- Impact
- Top 10% most cited in its field
- References
- 41 works
- Access
- Open access (repository copy)
- Research areas
- Dietary Effects on Health · Circadian rhythm and melatonin · Enhanced Recovery After Surgery
- Keywords
- Caloric theory, Medicine, Obesity, Randomized controlled trial, Caloric intake, Gerontology, Internal medicine
- MeSH
- humans, obesity, weight loss, lipids, caloric restriction, energy intake, adult, female, male, glycated hemoglobin
8 authors
From US
- Elizabeth A. Thomas · correspondingRocky Mountain MS Center; University of Colorado Anschutz
- Adnin ZamanUniversity of Colorado Anschutz
- Kelsey J. SloggettUniversity of Colorado Anschutz
- Sheila C. SteinkeUniversity of Colorado Anschutz
- Laura GrauColorado School of Public Health; University of Colorado Anschutz
- Victoria A. CatenacciUniversity of Colorado Anschutz
Abstract
Objective
This trial aimed to evaluate the acceptability and efficacy of early time-restricted eating plus daily caloric restriction (E-TRE+DCR) compared with DCR alone within a behavioral weight-loss intervention.
Methods
Participants (n = 81, 69 women, mean [SD] age: 38.0 [7.8] years, BMI: 34.1 [5.7] kg/m2 ) were randomized to E-TRE (10-hour eating window starting within 3 hours of waking) plus DCR or DCR alone (~35% DCR) for 39 weeks. The primary outcome was body weight (measured with digital scale) at week 12. Secondary outcomes measured at week 12 included hemoglobin A1c, lipids, energy intake (photographic food records), physical activity (accelerometry), dietary adherence (questionnaires), and body composition (dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry). Weight and body composition were also assessed at week 39.
Results
Mean [SD] weight loss was not different between groups at week 12 (E-TRE+DCR: -6.2 [4.1] kg vs. DCR: -5.1 [3.2] kg) or at week 39 (E-TRE: -4.9 [5.3] kg vs. DCR: -4.3 [5.3] kg). There were no between-group differences in changes in body composition, dietary adherence, energy intake, physical activity, hemoglobin A1c, or lipids at week 12.
Conclusions
E-TRE+DCR was found to be an acceptable dietary strategy, resulting in similar levels of adherence and weight loss compared with DCR alone.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher.
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.