Evidence Hub

Emotional Eating Interventions for Adults Living With Overweight and Obesity: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Behaviour Change Techniques

D. Power, A. Jones, C. Keyworth, P. Dhir, A. Griffiths, K. Shepherd, J. Smith, G. Traviss-Turner et al.

Journal of human nutrition and dietetics (Print), 2025

6,729 participants · 14 citations

Abstract

Abstract Background Emotional eating (EE) is a barrier to the long‐term success of weight loss interventions. Psychological interventions targeting EE have been shown to reduce EE scores and weight (kg), though the mechanisms remain unclear. This review and meta‐analysis aimed to identify the specific behaviour change techniques (BCTs) associated with improved outcomes. Methods This is a review update and extension, with new studies extracted from searches of CINAHL, PsycINFO, MEDLINE and EMBASE 1 January 2022 to 31 April 2023. EE interventions for adults with BMI > 25 kg/m2 were considered for inclusion. Paper screening, extraction, BCT‐coding and risk of bias were completed using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist, Behaviour Change Taxonomy v1 (BCTTv1) and Risk of Bias2 (RoB2)/Risk of Bias In Non‐randomised Studies (ROBINS‐I) tool. Narrative syntheses and random effects multi‐level meta‐analyses were conducted. Results In total, 6729 participants were included across 47 studies (13 identified in the update). Forty‐two studies contributed to the pooled estimate for the impact of interventions on EE (SMD = −0.99 [95% CI: −0.73 to −1.25], p < 0.001). Thirty‐two studies contributed to the pooled estimate for the impact of interventions on weight (−4.09 kg [95% CI: −2.76 to −5.43 kg], p < 0.001). Five BCTs related to identity, values and self‐regulation were associated with notable improvements to both weight and EE (‘incompatible…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 6,729 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free