TABLE 3

Summary of the Strength of Evidence for Weight-Related Outcomes in Studies Taking Place in the Home

SettingIntervention, No. of StudiesYear of PublicationEnrolled Participants, NNumber of Studies with Low/Moderate/High Risk of BiasPercentage With Favorable OutcomeRisk of BiasaConsistencybPrecisioncStrength of Evidenced
P < .05P < .05 Not Necessary
HomeD, 12004590/1/000ModerateNAImpreciseInsufficient
C, 32001–20122620/2/1033ModerateInconsistentImpreciseLow
Home, PC, CHIC, 120068781/0/000LowNAImpreciseInsufficient
Home, school, communityC, 1200913230/0/100HighNAImpreciseInsufficient
  • C, combination of diet and PA interventions; D, diet; CHI, consumer health informatics; NA, not applicable; PC, primary care.

  • a The Downs & Black instrument15 was used to assess the risk of bias in the included studies.

  • b The body of evidence was considered as consistent in direction if ≥70% of the studies had an effect in the same direction.

  • c We considered the body of evidence precise if ≥70% of the studies reported statistically significant results (P < .05) or had narrow confidence intervals that excluded the null).

  • d We considered the 4 recommended domains: (1) risk of bias in the included studies, (2) directness of the evidence, (3) consistency across studies, and (4) precision of the pooled estimate or the individual study estimates. We identified all studies as providing direct evidence because all of the studied interventions directly affected one of our primary outcomes of interest.