ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Weight bias internalization (WBI) is associated with poor weight-related health. The purpose of this study was to identify the prevalence and correlates of WBI in a large sample of adults in a commercial weight management programme. METHODS: WW (the new Weight Watchers) members participated in an online survey. Participants (N = 18,769) completed the 10-item Weight Bias Internalization Scale - Modified (WBIS-M) and the Weight Self-Stigma Questionnaire (WSSQ). Participants reported details about weight-stigmatizing experiences, including the onset, frequency and distress, and interpersonal sources of weight stigma. Participants self-reported their demographics, weight history, and height and weight (to compute body mass index [BMI]). RESULTS: Weight bias internalization was relatively high compared with the general population (mean WBIS-M score = 4.3 ± 1.4; mean WSSQ total score = 35.2 ± 9.7). WBI was higher among participants who were female, younger and had higher BMIs (p < 0.001) and lower among those who were Black and were widowed or had a romantic partner (p < 0.001). Onset of weight stigma in childhood and young adulthood, and recent distress due to weight stigma, predicted higher WBI. Extended family and school sources of weight stigma had weaker associations with WBI than did other interpersonal sources. CONCLUSIONS: Weight bias was internalized by a significant proportion of adults enrolled in a commercial weight management programme. A phenotype of WBI includes demographic characteristics and the timing and sources of weight stigma.
ABSTRACT
Objective: Evaluate the effects of an online commercial weight management program, with and without provision of a 'smart' scale with instructions to weigh daily and weekly tailored feedback, on weight loss and the frequency of body-weight self-monitoring. Methods: Participants (N = 92; body mass index 27-40 kg/m2) were randomized to 6 months of no-cost access to the Weight Watchers Online (WWO) platform alone, or enhanced with a cellular-connected 'smart' scale, instructions to weigh daily and weekly pre-scripted email feedback (Weight Watchers Online Enhanced [WWO-E]). The number of days that weight was self-monitored (via 'smart' scale in WWO-E and manually in WWO) was recorded automatically across the 6-month trial. Objective weight was measured at baseline, 3 and 6 months. Results: While both groups achieved statistically significant weight loss, mean ± standard error weight loss did not differ between WWO-E and WWO at 3 months (5.1 ± 0.6 kg vs. 4.0 ± 0.7 kg, respectively; p = 0.257) or 6 months (5.3 ± 0.6 kg vs. 3.9 ± 0.7 kg, respectively; p = 0.116). However, a greater proportion of WWO-E lost ≥5% of initial body weight at 3 months (52.2% vs. 28.3%; p = 0.033), but not 6 months (43.5% vs. 30.4%; p = 0.280), compared with WWO. Mean ± standard deviation days with self-monitored weight was higher in WWO-E (80.5 ± 5.6; 44.7% of days) than WWO (12.0 ± 1.0; 6.7% of days; p < 0.001) across the 6-month study period. Conclusions: This is the first study to show that provision of a 'smart' scale with weekly tailored feedback substantially increased the frequency of self-weighing and the proportion of participants achieving an initial clinically significant ≥5% weight loss (52% vs. 28%) in an online commercial weight management program. Both WWO and WWO-E produced significant weight loss over 6 months. While mean weight losses were slightly greater in the enhanced group, the difference was not statistically significant in this small sample. This study provides support for the clinical utility of online commercial weight management programs and the potential for supporting technology such as 'smart' scales to improve adherence to body-weight self-monitoring and clinical outcomes.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Nearly 20 years ago, participants in behavioural weight loss programmes reported goals that greatly exceeded the amount of weight typically produced by these programmes. Whether having unrealistic weight loss goals impacts weight loss or attrition is unclear. The intent of the current study was to revisit current weight loss goals and examine whether goals impact outcomes. METHODS: Adults (N = 308, BMI = 33.7 ± 4.2 kg/m2) participated in a 12-month behavioural weight management programme and completed questionnaires about their goals. RESULTS: Participants' weight loss goal was 19.8 ± 7.9% of their body weight, and 90.4% selected a goal ≥10%. Weight goals were not associated with weight loss at 3 (p = 0.75) or 12 months (p = 0.47), or from 3 to 12 months (p = 0.55). Weight loss goals were not related to attrition at 3 (p = 0.91) or 12 months (p = 0.86). Participants believed that weight reduction would positively impact their health and psychosocial functioning. CONCLUSION: Weight loss goals have decreased, but still greatly exceed what can be expected by most. Unrealistic goals, however, had no impact on weight loss or attrition. These results question the utility of counseling people with obesity to set more realistic weight loss goals, which is typically practiced in behavioural weight management.
