Umbrella review of time-restricted eating on weight loss, fasting blood glucose, and lipid profile
Chew HSJ, Ang WHD, Tan ZYA, Ang WW, Chan KS, Lau Y
Nutrition reviews · 24 citations
Review labels
Neutral facts our review recorded about how this study was done. They describe method, never whether we like the result.
How it was studied
- Design
- Systematic review (indexed by PubMed)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Health markers and function
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Funding not disclosed
Publication
- Published
- 2022-12-15 · Nutr Rev · vol. 81 · issue 9 · pp. 1180–1199
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press
- Cited
- 25 citations · more than 92% of similar papers · 2.7× the field average
- Impact
- Top 10% most cited in its field
- References
- 79 works
- Access
- Paywalled
- Research areas
- Dietary Effects on Health · Enhanced Recovery After Surgery · Genetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms
- Keywords
- Overweight, Meta-analysis, Medicine, Context (archaeology), Weight loss, Obesity, Internal medicine, Cholesterol, Systematic review, Blood lipids, Endocrinology, Data extraction, MEDLINE, Biology, Biochemistry
- MeSH
- humans, weight loss, blood glucose, fasting, cholesterol, ldl, systematic reviews as topic
6 authors
From SG, MO
- Han Shi Jocelyn ChewNational University of Singapore
- Wei How Darryl AngNational University of Singapore
- Zhen Yang Abel TanNational University of Singapore
- Wen Wei AngNational University of Singapore
- Kin Sun ChanUniversity of Macau; City University of Macau
- Ying Lau · correspondingNational University of Singapore
Abstract
Context
A growing number of systematic reviews with meta-analyses have examined the effectiveness of time-restricted eating (TRE) in reducing weight and improving fasting blood glucose and lipid profiles. However, mixed results have been found, and its effectiveness remains uncertain.
Objective
This umbrella review aimed to summarize systematic reviews that (1) examine the effects of TRE on weight loss, fasting blood glucose, total cholesterol, triglycerides, high-density-lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in individuals with overweight and obesity; and (2) compare the effect sizes on these outcomes between conventional TRE and Ramadan fasting.
Data sources
A total of 11 databases were searched from inception until March 11, 2022.
Data extraction
Two independent reviewers performed article selection, data extraction, and quality assessment.
Data analysis
Seven systematic reviews with 30 unique meta-analyses involving 7231 participants from 184 primary studies were included. The quality of each review was evaluated as moderate (14.3%) or critically low (85.7%) according to the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2. The degree of overlap was rated as slight for all outcomes (corrected cover area = 1.04%-4.27%). Meta-analyses at the meta-data level suggest that TRE is beneficial for reducing weight (P = .006) and fasting blood glucose (P < .01). Meta-analyses at the primary study level suggest that the effect on LGL-C was significant (P = .03). Subgroup analyses revealed greater effects in lowering fasting blood glucose, total cholesterol, and LDL-C from Ramadan fasting than from conventional TRE. The credibility of evidence was rated as suggestive (3.3%), weak (36.7%) or nonsignificant (60%) using a classification method.
Conclusion
TRE may complement usual care and reduce body weight and fasting blood glucose. Rigorous randomized controlled trials with long-term assessments in a wide range of populations are warranted.
Systematic review registration
PROSPERO registration no. CRD42022325657.
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.