GP delivered brief weight loss advice: associations between in-consultation behaviour change techniques and patient weight loss in recorded primary care discussions.

Background: Primary care clinicians are encouraged to intervene opportunistically, offering weight-loss advice to people living with obesity. The BWeL trial showed patients receiving brief weight-loss advice from their general practitioner lost weight at one year follow-up. We examined the behaviour change techniques (BCTs) clinicians used to identify which BCTs are associated with this weight loss. Methods: We coded 224 audio recorded interventions from the BWeL trial using the behavioural change techniques version one taxonomy (BCTTv1) and the 'refined taxonomy of behaviour change techniques to help people change their physical activity and healthy eating behaviours' (CALOR-RE taxonomy). Linear and logistic regressions were performed to analyse associations between behaviour change techniques used in these taxonomies and patient weight loss. Results: Mean intervention length was 86 s. We identified 28 different BCTs BCTTv1 and 22 from CALOR-RE. No BCTs or BCT domains were associated with mean weight loss at 12 months, loss of 5% bodyweight, or action taken at 3 months. The BCT 'Feedback on outcomes of behaviour (future)' was associated with an increased likelihood that the patient reported taking action to lose weight by 12 months (OR = 6.10, 95%CI = 1.20, 31.0). Conclusion: Although we found no evidence to support the use of particular BCTs, our results suggest that it is the brief intervention itself, rather than specific content, which may motivate weight loss. This can support clinicians to confidently intervene without needing complex training. Offering follow-up appointments can support positive changes to health behaviours, even if these are not associated with weight loss.

Effects of environmental impact and nutrition labelling on food purchasing: An experimental online supermarket study.

Nutrition labels and ecolabels can support consumers to make healthier and more sustainable choices, and the former is now widespread. But there is no information on the impact of ecolabels in the presence of nutrition labels. The aims of this study were primarily to examine whether (1) ecolabels are effective at promoting sustainable purchasing behaviour if presented alongside nutrition labels; (2) and secondarily, whether nutrition labels are effective at promoting healthier purchasing if presented alongside ecolabels. Participants (N = 2730) visited an experimental online supermarket platform, and were randomised to see products with (1) environmental impact labels only; (2) nutrition (NutriScore) labels only; (3) both environmental and nutrition labels; (4) no labels. Linear regressions compared the mean environmental impact scores (EIS; primary outcome) and health scores of products in participants' shopping baskets across each condition. Compared to control (no labels) there were significant reductions in the EIS when environmental impact labels were presented: Alone (-1.3, 95%CI: -2.3 to -0.4) or With nutrition labels (-2.0, 95%CI: -2.9 to -1.0), with no evidence of differences in effectiveness between these two conditions. There was no evidence of an impact of nutrition labels on either the EIS or the healthiness of purchases, both when nutrition labels were shown alone and when ecolabels were also present. Environmental impact labels may be effective at encouraging more sustainable purchases alone or when used alongside nutrition labels. This adds to the evidence base on the feasibility and effectiveness of environmental impact labelling as an important measure to change dietary behaviour to improve planetary health.

Evaluation of OPTIMISE (Online Programme to Tackle Individual's Meat Intake Through Self-regulation): Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: There is an urgent need to reduce society's meat consumption to help mitigate climate change and reduce noncommunicable diseases. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate changes in meat intake after participation in an online, multicomponent, self-regulation intervention. METHODS: We conducted a pre-post observational study among adult meat eaters in the United Kingdom who signed up to a website offering support based on self-regulation theory to reduce meat consumption. The program lasted 9 weeks (including a 1-week baseline phase, a 4-week active intervention phase, and a 4-week maintenance phase), comprising self-monitoring, goal setting, action planning, and health and environmental feedback. Meat intake was estimated during weeks 1, 5, and 9 using a 7-day meat frequency questionnaire. We analyzed the change in mean daily meat intake from baseline to week 5 and week 9 among those reporting data using a hierarchical linear mixed model. We assessed changes in attitudes toward meat consumption by questionnaire and considered the acceptability and feasibility of the intervention. RESULTS: The baseline cohort consisted of 289 participants, of whom 77 were analyzed at week 5 (26.6% of the baseline sample) and 55 at week 9 (71.4% of the week 5 sample). We observed large reductions in meat intake at 5 and 9 weeks: -57 (95% CI -70 to -43) g/day (P<.001) and -49 (95% CI -64 to -34) g/day (P<.001), respectively. Participants' meat-free self-efficacy increased, meat-eating identities moved toward reduced-meat and non-meat-eating identities, and perceptions of meat consumption as the social norm reduced. Participants who completed the study reported high engagement and satisfaction with the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Among people motivated to engage, this online self-regulation program may lead to large reductions in meat intake for more than 2 months, with promising signs of a change in meat-eating identity toward more plant-based diets. This digital behavior change intervention could be offered to complement population-level interventions to support reduction of meat consumption.

Effects of environmental impact labels on the sustainability of food purchases: Two randomised controlled trials in an experimental online supermarket.

Providing consumers with product-specific environmental impact information for food products (ecolabels) may promote more sustainable purchasing, needed to meet global environmental targets. Two UK studies investigated the effectiveness of different ecolabels using an experimental online supermarket platform. Study 1 (N = 1051 participants) compared three labels against control (no label), while Study 2 (N = 4979) tested four designs against control. Study 1 found significant reductions in the environmental impact score (EIS) for all labels compared to control (labels presented: values for four environmental indicators [-3.9 percentiles, 95%CIs: -5.2,-2.6]; a composite score [taking values from A to E; -3.9, 95%CIs: -5.2,-2.5]; or both together [-3.2, 95%CIs: -4.5,-1.9]). Study 2 showed significant reductions in EIS compared to control for A-E labels [-2.3, 95%CIs: -3.0,-1.5], coloured globes with A-E scores [-3.2, 95%CIs:-3.9,-2.4], and red globes highlighting 'worse' products [-3.2, 95%CIs:-3.9,-2.5]. There was no evidence that green globes highlighting 'better' products were effective [-0.5, 95%CIs:-1.3,0.2]. Providing ecolabels is a promising intervention to promote the selection of more sustainable products.

Effectiveness of an Online Programme to Tackle Individual's Meat Intake through SElf-regulation (OPTIMISE): A randomised controlled trial.

PURPOSE: A reduction in meat intake is recommended to meet health and environmental sustainability goals. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of an online self-regulation intervention to reduce meat consumption. METHODS: One hundred and fifty one adult meat eaters were randomised 1:1 to a multi-component self-regulation intervention or an information-only control. The study lasted 9 weeks (1-week self-monitoring; 4-week active intervention; and 4-week maintenance phase). The intervention included goal-setting, self-monitoring, action-planning, and health and environmental feedback. Meat intake was estimated through daily questionnaires in weeks 1, 5 and 9. The primary outcome was change in meat consumption from baseline to five weeks. Secondary outcomes included change from baseline to nine weeks and change in red and processed meat intake. We used linear regression models to assess the effectiveness of all the above outcomes. RESULTS: Across the whole sample, meat intake was 226 g/day at baseline, 118 g/day at five weeks, and 114 g/day at nine weeks. At five weeks, the intervention led to a 40 g/day (95%CI - 11.6,- 67.5, P = 0.006) reduction in meat intake, including a 35 g/day (95%CI - 7.7, - 61.7, P = 0.012) reduction in red and processed meat, relative to control. There were no significant differences in meat reduction after the four-week maintenance phase (- 12 g/day intervention vs control, 95% CI 19.1, - 43.4, P = 0.443). Participants said the intervention was informative and eye-opening. CONCLUSION: The intervention was popular among participants and helped achieve initial reductions in meat intake, but the longer-term reductions did not exceed control. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04961216, 14th July 2021, retrospectively registered.

Comparison of Three Dietary Assessment Methods to Estimate Meat Intake as Part of a Meat Reduction Intervention among Adults in the UK.

Food diaries are used to estimate meat intake at an individual level but it is unclear whether simpler methods would provide similar results. This study assessed the agreement between 7 day food diaries in which composite dishes were disaggregated to assess meat content (reference method), and two simpler methods: (1) frequency meal counts from 7 day food diaries; and (2) 7 day dietary recalls, each using standard estimated portion sizes. We compared data from a randomized controlled trial testing a meat reduction intervention. We used Bland-Altman plots to assess the level of agreement between methods at baseline and linear mixed-effects models to compare estimates of intervention effectiveness. At baseline, participants consumed 132 g/d (±75) of total meat; frequency meal counts and dietary recalls underestimated this by an average of 30 and 34 g/day, respectively. This was partially explained by an underestimation of the assumed portion size. The two simpler methods also underestimated the effect of the intervention, relative to control, though the significant effect of the intervention was unchanged. Simpler methods underestimated absolute meat intake but may be suitable for use in studies to measure the change in meat intake in individuals over time.

A dynamic social norm messaging intervention to reduce meat consumption: A randomized cross-over trial in retail store restaurants.

Perceptions of social norms around eating behavior can influence food choices. Communicating information about how others are changing their eating behavior over time (dynamic descriptive social norms) may motivate individuals to change their own food selection and consumption. Following a four-week baseline period, 22 in-store restaurants of a major retail chain across the UK were randomized to display a dynamic descriptive social norm message intended to motivate a shift from meat-to plant-based meals either during the first two, or last two weeks of the four-week study period. A linear regression model showed there was no evidence of an effect of the intervention (ß = -0.022, p = .978, 95% CIs: -1.63, 1.58) on the percentage sales of meat- vs plant-based dishes. Fidelity checks indicated that adherence to the intervention procedure was often low, with inconsistencies in the placement and display of the intervention message. In four stores with high fidelity the estimated impact of the intervention was not materially different. The lack of apparent effectiveness of the intervention may reflect poor efficacy of the intervention or limitations in its implementation in a complex food purchasing environment. The challenges highlighted by this study should be considered in future design and evaluation of field trials in real-world settings.

The Effects of Environmental Sustainability Labels on Selection, Purchase, and Consumption of Food and Drink Products: A Systematic Review.

This review assessed the effects of environmental labels on consumers' demand for more sustainable food products. Six electronic databases were searched for experimental studies of ecolabels and food choices. We followed standard Cochrane methods and results were synthesized using vote counting. Fifty-six studies (N = 42,768 participants, 76 interventions) were included. Outcomes comprised selection (n = 14), purchase (n = 40) and consumption (n = 2). The ecolabel was presented as text (n = 36), logo (n = 13) or combination (n = 27). Message types included: organic (n = 25), environmentally sustainable (n = 27), greenhouse gas emissions (n = 17), and assorted "other" message types (n = 7). Ecolabels were tested in actual (n = 15) and hypothetical (n = 41) environments. Thirty-nine studies received an unclear or high RoB rating. Sixty comparisons favored the intervention and 16 favored control. Ecolabeling with a variety of messages and formats was associated with the selection and purchase of more sustainable food products.

Development and Reliability of the Oxford Meat Frequency Questionnaire.

Reliable and valid measurements of meat intake are needed to advance understanding of its health effects and to evaluate interventions to reduce meat consumption. Here, we describe the development and reliability of the Oxford Meat Frequency Questionnaire (MFQ). It asks individuals to report the number of servings of meat and seafood products they consumed in the last 24 h and is administered daily over 7 days. The MFQ combines food portion size data from the UK Food Standards Agency with estimates of meat content in composite dishes from the UK's National Diet and Nutrition Survey. Adults who self-reported to eat meat (n = 129) completed a 3-week web-based test-retest reliability study assessing the MFQ twice, with a wash-out week in the middle. Two-way random intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) revealed moderate to good agreement on all meat outcomes (total meat ICC = 0.716; minimum-maximum individual components = 0.531-0.680), except for fish and seafood (ICC = 0.257). Participants reported finding the questionnaire easy to use and, on average, completed it in less than 2 min. This new MFQ offers a quick, acceptable, and reliable method to measure changes in an individual's meat intake in a UK population.

Exploring women's thoughts on self-weighing during pregnancy: results of the Self-Weighing in Pregnancy: Experiences (SWIPE) study.

BACKGROUND: Excess gestational weight gain is common and an important risk factor for adverse pregnancy outcomes. Regular weighing can be used to assess and manage weight gain, but NICE guidelines do not recommend routine weighing during antenatal care. Trials that have tested the effectiveness of self-weighing to manage GWG have been unsuccesful in engaging women in regular self-weighing, although the reasons for lack of engagement are not fully understood. This study aimed to understand why this lack of engagement occurred by exploring the naturally occurring thoughts and feelings of pregnant women (9 to 15 weeks gestational age) who were asked to weigh themselves at home. METHODS: Twenty-five women were recruited to take part. Participants completed short questionnaires at their first-trimester and 20-week scans. After recruitment, participants were asked to weigh themselves at roughly the same time each week for 8 weeks. Whilst they weighed themselves they were asked to audio-record their current weight and describe any thoughts or feelings that occurred as they weighed themselves. These audio recordings were then sent to researchers using a secure messaging service. RESULTS: Most of the recruited women (56%) were unaware of guidelines for gestational weight gain, and only 40% could identify the ideal rate of GWG for their BMI group. Thematic analysis of the think-aloud recordings resulted in three main themes: "understanding weight gain in pregnancy", "taking action to prevent weight gain" and "reactions to self-weighing". Overall, there was a relatively positive response to self-weighing and some participants used self-weighing to reflect on the reasons for weight gain and plan actions they could take to avoid excess gain. Negative emotional responses tended to be related to a lack of guidance about what level of weight gain or loss was "healthy", or to other worries about the pregnancy. Of the women recruited who submitted at least one think aloud recording (n 10), 80% found self-weighing to be useful, and said they would likely continue to self-weigh at home. CONCLUSIONS: Women had complex emotions about self-weighing during pregnancy but overall found it useful, suggesting it could be encouraged as part of self-regulatory interventions to control GWG. Clear guidelines about appropriate gestational weight gain could help to reduce anxiety. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was prospectively registered with ISRCTN ISRCTN10035244 .

What Makes Opportunistic GP Interventions Effective? An Analysis of Behavior Change Techniques Used in 237 GP-Delivered Brief Interventions for Weight Loss.

BACKGROUND: Evidence shows that clinician-delivered brief opportunistic interventions are effective in obesity, and guidelines promote their use. However, there is no evidence on how clinicians should do this, and guidelines are not based on clinical evidence. PURPOSE: A trial (Brief Interventions for Weight Loss [BWeL]) showed that brief opportunistic interventions on obesity that endorsed, offered, and facilitated referral to community weight management service (CWMS) led to 77% agreeing to attend, and 40% attending CWMS, as well as significantly greater weight loss than control at 12 months. We assessed which behavior change techniques (BCTs) doctors used that were associated with CWMS attendance. METHODS: We coded 237 recorded BWeL interventions using the behavioral change techniques version one taxonomy. We also coded the BWeL training video to examine delivery of recommended BCTs. Mixed effects logistic regression assessed the association between each BCT, the total number of BCTs, and delivery of recommended BCTs, with patient's agreement to attend and actual CWMS attendance. RESULTS: Of 237 patients, 133 (56%) agreed to attend and 109 (46%) attended. Thirteen BCTs were used more than eight times but none of the 13 were associated with increased attendance. One, "practical social support," was significantly associated with increased patient agreement (odds ratio [OR] = 4.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.15, 20.13). Delivery of recommended BCTs and the total number of BCTs used were both associated with increased agreement (OR = 1.56, 95% CI = 1.09, 2.23 and OR = 1.34, 95% CI = 1.03, 1.75, respectively), but not attendance at CWMS (OR = 1.20, 95% CI = 0.98-1.47 and OR = 1.08, 95% CI = 0.94-1.24, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence that particular BCT can increase the effectiveness of brief opportunistic interventions for obesity in adults. However, using more BCTs and delivery of recommended BCTs may increase agreement to attend community weight management services.

Effectiveness of a self-regulation intervention for weight loss: A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate effectiveness and acceptability of a novel intervention, based on self-regulation theory, for weight loss. DESIGN: A two-arm parallel group design was employed. METHODS: Adult participants with a BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 and the aim to lose weight were recruited and randomized to either a control or intervention group. Both groups were asked to weigh themselves daily for eight weeks. The intervention group was encouraged to use a weight tracking app, and complete daily and weekly questionnaires to prompt action planning, reflection, and evaluation of actions. Participants chose daily actions from a menu of 53 behaviours. The primary outcome was weight change after 8 weeks, assessed using linear mixed effects models. At follow-up, 20 intervention group participants were interviewed regarding their experiences in the trial. RESULTS: 100 participants were recruited, and 98% were followed up at 8 weeks. Mean weight loss was -4.18 kg (SD = 3.84) in the intervention compared to -1.01 kg (SD = 2.67) in the control group; the adjusted difference was -3.20 kg (95% CI -4.49, -1.92). Participants rated the intervention's usefulness as 8.25 (SD = 2.04) on a scale from 1 to 10. Adherence was a significant independent predictor of weight loss success (-1.54 kg per one SD, 95% CI -2.16, -0.93), but not a mediator of the intervention effect. Participants reported that the intervention enabled them to experiment with and identify effective weight loss actions. CONCLUSIONS: Guiding participants through the self-regulation process was feasible, acceptable to participants, and led to significantly greater short-term weight loss than unguided self-weighing.

Should azithromycin be used to treat COVID-19? A rapid review.

BACKGROUND: There are no established effective treatments for COVID-19. While novel drugs are being developed, azithromycin has been identified as a candidate treatment in the interim. AIM: To review the evidence for the effectiveness and safety of azithromycin in treating COVID-19. DESIGN & SETTING: A rapid review of the literature was conducted. METHOD: Electronic searches were conducted on 16 April 2020 of PubMed, TRIP, EPPI COVID Living Map, MedRxiv, GoogleScholar, and Google. In vivo and in vitro studies were included assessing the safety and effectiveness of azithromycin for treatment of COVID-19, and/or the activity of azithromycin against SARS-CoV-2. In vivo studies needed to include a comparator group. RESULTS: Three studies were identified, two in vitro and one in vivo, which were suitable for inclusion. All three were published as pre-prints. The in vitro studies revealed conflicting results, with one finding anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity for azithromycin alone, while the other found activity against SARS-CoV-2 only when azithromycin was combined with hydroxychloroquine. A small trial of 36 patients, with high risk of bias, found superior viral clearance in patients with COVID-19 treated with azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine combined, compared with hydroxychloroquine alone. CONCLUSION: There is no evidence to support the use of azithromycin for the treatment of COVID-19 outside of the context of clinical trials, unless it is used to treat bacterial super-infection. There is extremely limited evidence of a possible synergy between azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine. The adverse events profile of azithromycin in the context of COVID-19 has not yet been established. Well-conducted clinical trials are urgently needed in this area.

Should chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine be used to treat COVID-19? A rapid review.

BACKGROUND: On the 11 March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared that COVID-19 was a pandemic. To date, there are no medical treatments for COVID-19 with proven effectiveness. Novel treatments and/or vaccines will take time to be developed and distributed to patients. In light of this, there has been growing interest in the use of existing medications, such as chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), as potential treatments of this disease. AIM: To establish the current evidence for the effectiveness of CQ and HCQ in treating COVID-19. DESIGN & SETTING: A rapid review of the literature was conducted. METHOD: Electronic searches in PubMed and Google Scholar were conducted on 21 March 2020. A further search was conducted in Google for relevant literature on 28 March 2020. RESULTS: There is limited evidence of in vitro activity of CQ/HCQ against SARS-CoV-2. A number of in vivo clinical trials are underway. The empirical data available from two of these trials reveal conflicting results. Both trials are characterised by small numbers of participants (n = 30 and n = 36) and suffer methodological limitations. No medium or long-term follow-up data is available. CONCLUSION: At present, there is insufficient evidence to determine whether CQ/HCQ are safe and effective treatments for COVID-19. High quality, adequately powered randomised clinical trials in primary and secondary care settings are urgently required to guide policymakers and clinicians. These studies should report medium- and long-term follow-up results, and safety data.

Patterns in Weight and Physical Activity Tracking Data Preceding a Stop in Weight Monitoring: Observational Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Self-regulation for weight loss requires regular self-monitoring of weight, but the frequency of weight tracking commonly declines over time. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate whether it is a decline in weight loss or a drop in motivation to lose weight (using physical activity tracking as a proxy) that may be prompting a stop in weight monitoring. METHODS: We analyzed weight and physical activity data from 1605 Withings Health Mate app users, who had set a weight loss goal and stopped tracking their weight for at least six weeks after a minimum of 16 weeks of continuous tracking. Mixed effects models compared weight change, average daily steps, and physical activity tracking frequency between a 4-week period of continuous tracking and a 4-week period preceding the stop in weight tracking. Additional mixed effects models investigated subsequent changes in physical activity data during 4 weeks of the 6-week long stop in weight tracking. RESULTS: People lost weight during continuous tracking (mean -0.47 kg, SD 1.73) but gained weight preceding the stop in weight tracking (mean 0.25 kg, SD 1.62; difference 0.71 kg; 95% CI 0.60 to 0.81). Average daily steps (beta=-220 daily steps per time period; 95% CI -320 to -120) and physical activity tracking frequency (beta=-3.4 days per time period; 95% CI -3.8 to -3.1) significantly declined from the continuous tracking to the pre-stop period. From pre-stop to post-stop, physical activity tracking frequency further decreased (beta=-6.6 days per time period; 95% CI -7.12 to -6.16), whereas daily step count on the day's activity was measured increased (beta=110 daily steps per time period; 95% CI 50 to 170). CONCLUSIONS: In the weeks before people stop tracking their weight, their physical activity and physical activity monitoring frequency decline. At the same time, weight increases, suggesting that declining motivation for weight control and difficulties with making use of negative weight feedback might explain why people stop tracking their weight. The increase in daily steps but decrease in physical activity tracking frequency post-stop might result from selective measurement of more active days.

Analysing self-regulatory behaviours in response to daily weighing: a think-aloud study with follow-up interviews.

Objective: To examine the extent to which people who are trying to lose weight naturally self-regulate in response to self-weighing and to identify barriers to self-regulation. Design/Main Outcome Measures: Twenty-four participants, who were overweight and trying to lose weight, recorded their thoughts during daily weighing for eight weeks. Semi-structured follow-up interviews assessed participant experiences. Qualitative analysis identified steps of the self-regulation process and barriers to self-regulation. Exploratory regression analysis assessed the relationship between the self-regulation steps and weight loss. Results: On 90% of 498 occasions, participants compared their weight measurement to an expectation or goal, and on 58% they reflected on previous behaviour. Action planning only occurred on 20% of occasions, and specific action planning was rare (6%). Only specific action planning significantly predicted weight loss (-2.1 kg per 1 SD increase in the predictor, 95% CI = -3.9, -0.3). Thematic analysis revealed that barriers to the interpretation of daily weight changes were difficulties in understanding day-to-day fluctuations, losing the overview of trends, forgetting to weigh, and forgetting previous measurements. Conclusion: Specific action planning can lead to weight loss, but is rare in a naturalistic setting. Barriers to self-regulation relate to the interpretation of weight changes.

Testing the effectiveness of a weight loss intervention to enhance self-regulation in adults who are obese: protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Previous trials finding an effect of self-monitoring on weight loss have considered the effect to be mediated by self-regulatory processes. However, a qualitative think-aloud study asking people to record thoughts and feelings during weighing showed that self-regulation occurs only rarely without further instruction. The aim of this trial is to test a novel intervention guiding people through the self-regulatory processes to see whether it facilitates weight loss. METHODS AND ANALYSES: A parallel group, randomised controlled trial will be conducted to test the concept that a self-regulation intervention for weight loss increases weight loss compared with daily self-weighing without further support. One hundred participants with a body mass index ≥30 kg/m2 will be randomised to either the control or intervention group. The control group will be asked to weigh themselves daily for 8 weeks, the intervention group will be encouraged to follow the self-regulation intervention. They will be prompted to weigh daily, track their weight using an app, plan daily actions for weight loss and reflect on their action plans on a weekly basis. This self-regulation cycle will allow them to experiment with different weight loss strategies and identify effective and sustainable actions. Primary and process outcomes will be measured at baseline and 8 weeks' follow-up. Linear regression analysis of the primary outcome, weight change, will assess the early effectiveness of the intervention. The process outcomes liking, perceived effectiveness, as well as usage and barriers with regard to the self-regulation intervention, will be assessed through qualitative analysis of follow-up interviews and quantitative analysis of adherence rates and responses to a final questionnaire. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This trial was reviewed and approved by the NHS National Research Ethics Committee and the Health Research Authority (reference number: 18/SC/0482). The findings of the trial will be published in peer reviewed journals and presented at conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN14148239, prerecruitment. PROTOCOL VERSION: Version 1.1, 7 December 2018.

Grocery store interventions to change food purchasing behaviors: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Background: Diet is an important determinant of health, and food purchasing is a key antecedent to consumption. Objective: We set out to evaluate the effectiveness of grocery store interventions to change food purchasing, and to examine whether effectiveness varied based on intervention components, setting, or socioeconomic status. Design: We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (search performed June 2017). Studies must have: aimed to change food purchasing; been implemented in grocery stores (real or simulated); reported purchasing; and had a minimal control or compared interventions fulfilling our criteria. Searching, screening, bias assessment, and data extraction followed Cochrane methods. We grouped studies by intervention type (economic, environmental, swaps, and/or education), synthesized results narratively, and conducted an exploratory qualitative comparative analysis. Results: We included 35 studies representing 89 interventions, >20,000 participants, and >800 stores. Risk of bias was mixed. Economic interventions showed the most promise, with 8 of the 9 studies in real stores and all 6 in simulated environments detecting an effect on purchasing. Swap interventions appeared promising in the 2 studies based in real stores. Store environment interventions showed mixed effects. Education-only interventions appeared effective in simulated environments but not in real stores. Available data suggested that effects of economic interventions did not differ by socioeconomic status, whereas for other interventions impact was variable. In our qualitative comparative analysis, economic interventions (regardless of setting) and environmental and swap interventions in real stores were associated with statistically significant changes in purchasing in the desired direction for ≥1 of the foods targeted by the intervention, whereas education-only interventions in real stores were not. Conclusions: Findings suggest that interventions implemented in grocery stores-particularly ones that manipulate price, suggest swaps, and perhaps manipulate item availability-have an impact on purchasing and could play a role in public health strategies to improve health. Review protocol registered at https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ as CRD42017068809.

Insights From Google Play Store User Reviews for the Development of Weight Loss Apps: Mixed-Method Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Significant weight loss takes several months to achieve, and behavioral support can enhance weight loss success. Weight loss apps could provide ongoing support and deliver innovative interventions, but to do so, developers must ensure user satisfaction. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to conduct a review of Google Play Store apps to explore what users like and dislike about weight loss and weight-tracking apps and to examine qualitative feedback through analysis of user reviews. METHODS: The Google Play Store was searched and screened for weight loss apps using the search terms weight loss and weight track*, resulting in 179 mobile apps. A content analysis was conducted based on the Oxford Food and Activity Behaviors taxonomy. Correlational analyses were used to assess the association between complexity of mobile health (mHealth) apps and popularity indicators. The sample was then screened for popular apps that primarily focus on weight-tracking. For the resulting subset of 15 weight-tracking apps, 569 user reviews were sampled from the Google Play Store. Framework and thematic analysis of user reviews was conducted to assess which features users valued and how design influenced users' responses. RESULTS: The complexity (number of components) of weight loss apps was significantly positively correlated with the rating (r=.25; P=.001), number of reviews (r=.28; P<.001), and number of downloads (r=.48; P<.001) of the app. In contrast, in the qualitative analysis of weight-tracking apps, users expressed preference for simplicity and ease of use. In addition, we found that positive reinforcement through detailed feedback fostered users' motivation for further weight loss. Smooth functioning and reliable data storage emerged as critical prerequisites for long-term app usage. CONCLUSIONS: Users of weight-tracking apps valued simplicity, whereas users of comprehensive weight loss apps appreciated availability of more features, indicating that complexity demands are specific to different target populations. The provision of feedback on progress can motivate users to continue their weight loss attempts. Users value seamless functioning and reliable data storage.