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
. 2019 Oct 25;7(10):e12612.
doi: 10.2196/12612.

Assessment of the Efficacy, Safety, and Effectiveness of Weight Control and Obesity Management Mobile Health Interventions: Systematic Review

Elisa Puigdomenech Puig  1   2   3 , Noemí Robles  2   3   4 , Francesc Saigí-Rubió  5   6 , Alberto Zamora  7   8 , Montse Moharra  1   9 , Guillermo Paluzie  7 , Mariona Balfegó  10 , Guillem Cuatrecasas Cambra  10 , Pilar Garcia-Lorda  5 , Carme Carrion  2   3   4   5
Affiliations

Assessment of the Efficacy, Safety, and Effectiveness of Weight Control and Obesity Management Mobile Health Interventions: Systematic Review

Elisa Puigdomenech Puig et al. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. .

Erratum in

Abstract

Background: The use of apps to tackle overweight and obesity by tracking physical and dietary patterns and providing recommendations and motivation strategies to achieve personalized goals has increased over recent years. However, evidence of the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of these apps is severely lacking.

Objective: The aim of this study was to identify efficacy, safety, and effectiveness criteria used to assess weight control, overweight, and obesity management in mobile health (mHealth) interventions through a systematic review.

Methods: PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, UK Trial Database, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Library were surveyed up to May 2018. All types of clinical studies were considered. A total of 2 independent reviewers assessed quality using Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) criteria. Ratings were used to provide an overall score for each study (low, moderate, or high). Data were synthesized in evidence tables.

Results: From 233 potentially relevant publications, only 28 studies were included. Of these, 13 (46%) were randomized control trials, 11 were single-arm studies (39%), 3 were nonrandomized controlled trials (11%), and 1 study was a cluster randomized trial (4%). The studies were classified as low (15), high (7), and moderate (6) quality according to SIGN criteria. All studies focused on efficacy, with only 1 trial mentioning safety and another 1 effectiveness. In 11 studies, the apps were used as stand-alone interventions, the others were multicomponent studies that included other tools for support such as sensors or websites. The main management tool included in the apps was feedback messaging (24), followed by goal-setting mechanisms (20) and self-monitoring (19). The majority of studies took weight or body mass index loss as the main outcome (22) followed by changes in physical activity (14) and diet (12). Regarding outputs, usability, adherence, and engagement (17) were the most reported, followed by satisfaction (7) and acceptability (4).

Conclusions: There is a remarkable heterogeneity among these studies and the majority have methodological limitations that leave considerable room for improvement. Further research is required to identify all relevant criteria for assessing the efficacy of mHealth interventions in the management of overweight and obesity.

Trial registration: PROSPERO CRD42017056761; https://tinyurl.com/y2zhxtjx.

Keywords: mHealth; obesity; overweight; systematic review; technology assessment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) flow diagram of selection of papers for inclusion in the review.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Garg SK, Maurer H, Reed K, Selagamsetty R. Diabetes and cancer: two diseases with obesity as a common risk factor. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2014 Feb;16(2):97–110. doi: 10.1111/dom.12124. doi: 10.1111/dom.12124. - DOI - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gittelsohn J, Trude A. Diabetes and obesity prevention: changing the food environment in low-income settings. Nutr Rev. 2017 Jan;75(suppl 1):62–9. doi: 10.1093/nutrit/nuw038. http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/28049750 nuw038 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Khaylis A, Yiaslas T, Bergstrom J, Gore-Felton C. A review of efficacious technology-based weight-loss interventions: five key components. Telemed J E Health. 2010 Nov;16(9):931–8. doi: 10.1089/tmj.2010.0065. http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/21091286 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Aguilar-Martínez A, Solé-Sedeño JM, Mancebo-Moreno G, Medina FX, Carreras-Collado R, Saigí-Rubió F. Use of mobile phones as a tool for weight loss: a systematic review. J Telemed Telecare. 2014 Sep;20(6):339–49. doi: 10.1177/1357633X14537777.1357633X14537777 - DOI - PubMed
    1. World Health Organization . Mhealth: New Horizons for Health Through Mobile Technologies: Second Global Survey on Ehealth. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2011.

Publication types