Evidence Hub

The Effect of Meal Replacement on Weight Loss According to Calorie-Restriction Type and Proportion of Energy Intake: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Jih-Yun Min, Seo-young Kim, I. Shin, Young-Bae Park, Young-Woo Lim

Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 2021

1,982 participants · 32 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Portion control is a useful component of weight reduction interventions and meal replacement (MR) plans represent a promising strategy for portion control. Research performed with pooled data on the effect of MR plans according to various characteristics of MR interventions remains scarce.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to assess the effects of MR-based diets compared with food-based diets on weight loss, according to calorie-restriction types and energy intake proportions from MR.

METHODS

Electronic databases (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, Embase, and Research Information Sharing Service) were searched for randomized controlled trials on weight loss results of MR-based calorie-restricted diets compared with food-based calorie-restricted diets from January 2000 to May 2020. Standardized mean differences (Hedges' g) from all study outcomes were calculated using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was quantified by Q test and I2. Publication bias was assessed using a funnel plot and a trim and fill method. Both interventions (MR and control) were separated into very-low-energy diets and low-energy diets (LEDs). A meta-analysis of variance was conducted by dividing patient-related factors and treatment-related factors into subgroups. In multivariable meta-regressions, background variables were selected first, after which main independent variables were included.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies involving 24 interventions and 1,982 patients who were…

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: 1,982 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