{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.049479166666666664, 'fraction_numerical': 0.021484375, 'mean_word_length': 5.19758064516129, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Critical Review and Meta-Analysis of Multicomponent Behavioral E-Health Interventions for Weight Loss

Objectives: Multicomponent behavioral e-health interventions are seen as an alternative to in-person treatment for weight loss. However, these estimates may be optimistic at best. This is the first meta-analysis to investigate the relative efficacy of multicomponent behavioral e-health interventions for weight loss against separate groups of active in-person treatment and passive controls (e.g., waitlist, no care, usual care, or placebo group). Method: Forty-seven randomized controlled trials on multicomponent e-health interventions for weight loss in overweight and/or obese adults were included. A random-effects model was used for pooling the effect sizes, which were calculated for weight and behavioral outcomes at posttreatment and follow-up. Results: Standard active treatment was more effective than e-health interventions with respect to weight (g = −0.31, 95% CI [−0.43 to −0.20]). There was a statistically significant, albeit small effect size favoring e-health interventions relative to passive control groups for weight (g = 0.34, 95% CI [0.24 to 0.44]) and behavioral outcomes (g = 0.17, 95% CI [0.07 to 0.27]). Several potential moderator variables were examined and discussed. Conclusions: Overall, the findings raise concerns regarding the current potential of multicomponent behavioral e-health interventions as first-line treatment for weight-loss. Other limitations and possible implications are discussed.