Exploring factors of adherence to weight loss interventions in population with overweight/obesity: an umbrella review.

Adherence is key for achieving the optimal benefits from a weight loss intervention. Despite the number of studies on factors that promote adherence, their findings suggest inconsistent and fragmented evidence. The aim of this study was to review the existing factors of adherence to weight loss interventions and to find factors that facilitate the design of effective intervention programs. Six databases were searched for this umbrella review; after the screening process, 21 studies were included. A total of 47 factors were identified in six groups as relevant for adherence: (i) sociodemographic (n = 7), (ii) physical activity (n = 2), (iii) dietary (n = 8), (iv) behavioral (n = 4), (v) pharmacological (n = 3), and (vi) multi-intervention (n = 23). In addition, a map of adherence factors was created. The main findings are that with respect to demographic factors, the development of personalized intervention strategies based on the characteristics of specific populations is encouraged. Moreover, self-monitoring has been shown to be effective in behavioral, dietary, and multi-interventions, while technology has shown potential in dietary, behavioral, and multi-interventions. In addition, multi-interventions are adherence-promoting strategies, although more evidence is required on adherence to pharmacological interventions. Overall, the factor map can be controlled and modified by researchers and practitioners to improve adherence to weight loss interventions.

Efficacy of Split Versus Full-Body Resistance Training on Strength and Muscle Growth: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT: Ramos-Campo, DJ, Benito-Peinado, PJ, Caravaca, LA, Rojo-Tirado, MA, and Rubio-Arias, JÁ. Efficacy of split versus full-body resistance training on strength and muscle growth: a systematic review with meta-analysis. J Strength Cond Res 38(7): 1330-1340, 2024-No previous study has systematically compared the effect of 2 resistance training routines commonly used to increase muscle mass and strength (i.e., split [Sp] and full-body [FB] routines). Our objective was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines to compare the effects on strength gains and muscle growth in healthy adults. 14 studies (392 subjects) that compared Sp and FB routines in terms of strength adaptations and muscle growth were included. Regarding the effects of the Sp or FB routine on both bench press and lower limbs strength, the magnitude of the change produced by both routines was similar (bench press: mean difference [MD] = 1.19; [-1.28, 3.65]; p = 0.34; k = 14; lower limb: MD = 2.47; [-2.11, 7.05]; p = 0.29; k = 14). Concerning the effect of the Sp vs. FB routine on muscle growth, similar effects were observed after both routines in the cross-sectional area of the elbow extensors (MD = 0.30; [-2.65, 3.24]; p = 0.84; k = 4), elbow flexors (MD = 0.17; [-2.54, 2.88]; p = 0.91; k = 5), vastus lateralis (MD = -0.08; [-1.82, 1.66]; p = 0.93; k = 5), or lean body mass (MD = -0.07; [-1.59, 1.44]; p = 0.92; k = 6). In conclusion, the present systematic review and meta-analysis provides solid evidence that the use of Sp or FB routines within a resistance training program does not significantly impact either strength gains or muscle hypertrophy when volume is equated. Consequently, individuals are free to confidently select a resistance training routine based on their personal preferences.