Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2019 Apr;20(4):569-587.
doi: 10.1111/obr.12816. Epub 2019 Jan 24.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of meal replacements for weight loss

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of meal replacements for weight loss

Nerys M Astbury et al. Obes Rev. 2019 Apr.

Abstract

Meal replacements (MR) are generally not recommended in clinical guidelines for the management of obesity. The aim of this review is to provide an up-to-date systematic evaluation of the effect of weight loss interventions incorporating MR compared with alternative interventions on weight change at 1 year in adults with overweight or obesity. Six electronic databases were searched from inception to the end of August 2018 for randomized controlled trials comparing the effect of MR with interventions that did not include MR on weight at 1 year. We excluded studies using diets providing <3347 kJ/(800 kcal)/day and those which used total diet replacement (TDR) from this review. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Twenty-three studies with 7884 adult participants were included. Six out of 23 studies were judged at low risk of bias across all domains, and 5/23 studies were judged at high risk of bias in at least one domain. Studies with similar intervention and comparators were grouped into five comparisons for analysis. Mean weight change at 1 year favoured the MR group relative to the control group in each comparison. In those comparisons where we conducted meta-analysis, in people assigned to a diet incorporating MR, mean difference was -1.44 kg (-2.48 to -0.39 kg; I2 = 38%) compared with alternative kinds of diets. In those assigned to a MR diet along with support, mean difference was -2.22 kg (-3.99 to -0.45, I2 = 81%) compared with other diets with support and -3.87 kg (-7.34 to -0.40; I2 = 60%) compared with other kinds of diet without support. In those assigned a MR diet with an enhanced level of support, mean difference was -6.13 kg (-7.35 to -4.91, I2 = 19%) compared with alternative diets and regular support. Programmes incorporating meal replacements led to greater weight loss at 1 year than comparator weight loss programmes and should be considered as a valid option for management of overweight and obesity in community and health care settings.

Keywords: diet; meal replacement; obesity; weight loss.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

NMA, PA, and SAJ are investigators on a research grant from Cambridge Weight Plan UK Ltd. PA and SAJ are investigators on a research grant from Weight Watchers Inc.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Prisma flow diagram
Figure 2
Figure 2
Forest plot of mean weight change (kg) from baseline at 1 year between interventions incorporating meal replacements (MR) and control interventions by comparison group [Colour figure can be viewed at http://wileyonlinelibrary.com]
Figure 3
Figure 3
Forest plot of interim (>1 year) mean weight change (kg) from baseline between interventions incorporating meal replacements (MR) and control interventions by comparison group [Colour figure can be viewed at http://wileyonlinelibrary.com]
Figure 4
Figure 4
Forest plot of mean weight change (kg) from baseline at 2 years between interventions incorporating meal replacements (MR) and control interventions by comparison group [Colour figure can be viewed at http://wileyonlinelibrary.com]
Figure 5
Figure 5
Forest plot of mean weight change (kg) from baseline at 4 years between interventions incorporating meal replacements (MR) and control interventions by comparison group [Colour figure can be viewed at http://wileyonlinelibrary.com]

References

    1. World Health Organization , Global health risks: mortality and burden of disease attributable to selected major risks. 2009.
    1. Butland B, Jebb SA, McPherson K, et al. Tackling obesities: foresight report. 2007, Government Office for Science
    1. Wing RR, Lang W, Wadden TA, et al. Benefits of modest weight loss in improving cardiovascular risk factors in overweight and obese individuals with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2011;34(7):1481‐1486. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Knowler WC, Barrett‐Connor E, Fowler SE, et al. Reduction in the incidence of type 2 diabetes with lifestyle intervention or metformin. N Engl J Med. 2002;346(6):393‐403. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Birks S, Peeters A, Backholer K, O’Brien P, Brown W. A systematic review of the impact of weight loss on cancer incidence and mortality. Obes Rev. 2012;13(10):868‐891. - PubMed

Publication types