IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0151456.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of Registered Dietitian Expertise in Health Guidance for Weight Loss

Author

Listed:
  • Mie Imanaka
  • Masahiko Ando
  • Tetsuhisa Kitamura
  • Takashi Kawamura

Abstract

Background & Objectives: Expertise of registered dietitians (RDs) is important for health guidance but has been poorly evaluated. We evaluated the kind of RD expertise that would improve their skills. Design, Setting, Participants, Measurements: This study was a post-hoc analysis of our randomized controlled trial, which compared the weight change between participants using the web-based self-disclosure health support and those using the email health support. Healthy men and women aged 35–64 years with a body mass index (BMI) of > = 24.5 kg/m2 were recruited for this study. We evaluated the relationship of RD expertise indicators including the duration of working as an RD, the experience of health counseling, and membership in the Japan Dietetic Association (JDA) with the weight loss of study participants. The primary endpoint was the change in body weight. Comparison of changes in body weight by the RD expertise indicators was evaluated using analysis of covariance. Results: A total of 175 participants were eligible for analyses. Changes in body weight were significantly greater when they were supported by the RDs in the routine counseling group than when supported by the RDs in the non-routine counseling group (-1.8 kg versus -0.4 kg, fully adjusted P = 0.0089). Duration of working as an RD and JDA membership did not significantly affect changes in body weight. Conclusions: Among some indices of RD experience, the experience of providing routine experience of health counseling was associated with weight loss.

Suggested Citation

  • Mie Imanaka & Masahiko Ando & Tetsuhisa Kitamura & Takashi Kawamura, 2016. "Impact of Registered Dietitian Expertise in Health Guidance for Weight Loss," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-8, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0151456
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0151456
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0151456
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0151456&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0151456?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schulz, Amy J. & Israel, Barbara A. & Lantz, Paula, 2003. "Instrument for evaluating dimensions of group dynamics within community-based participatory research partnerships," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 249-262, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Blackstock, K.L. & Kelly, G.J. & Horsey, B.L., 2007. "Developing and applying a framework to evaluate participatory research for sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 726-742, February.
    2. José M. Díaz-Puente & José L. Yagüe & Ana Afonso, 2008. "Building Evaluation Capacity in Spain," Evaluation Review, , vol. 32(5), pages 478-506, October.
    3. Ward, Melanie & Schulz, Amy J. & Israel, Barbara A. & Rice, Kristina & Martenies, Sheena E. & Markarian, Evan, 2018. "A conceptual framework for evaluating health equity promotion within community-based participatory research partnerships," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 25-34.
    4. Wagemakers, Annemarie & Vaandrager, Lenneke & Koelen, Maria A. & Saan, Hans & Leeuwis, Cees, 2010. "Community health promotion: A framework to facilitate and evaluate supportive social environments for health," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 428-435, November.
    5. Izabela Simon Rampasso & Rodnei Bertazzoli & Thais Dibbern & Milena Pavan Serafim & Walter Leal Filho & Carolina Rojas-Córdova & Rosley Anholon, 2022. "Evaluating Research Partnerships through ISO 56003 Guidelines, RRI Concepts, and Ex Post Facto Cases," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-10, April.
    6. Dana H. Z. Williamson & Emma X. Yu & Candis M. Hunter & John A. Kaufman & Kelli Komro & Na’Taki Osborne Jelks & Dayna A. Johnson & Matthew O. Gribble & Michelle C. Kegler, 2020. "A Scoping Review of Capacity-Building Efforts to Address Environmental Justice Concerns," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-23, May.
    7. Theresia Krieger & Regina Specht & Babette Errens & Ulrike Hagen & Elisabeth Dorant, 2020. "Caring for Family Caregivers of Geriatric Patients: Results of a Participatory Health Research Project on Actual State and Needs of Hospital-Based Care Professionals," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(16), pages 1-17, August.
    8. Vetta L Sanders Thompson & Nora Leahy & Nicole Ackermann & Deborah J Bowen & Melody S Goodman, 2020. "Community partners’ responses to items assessing stakeholder engagement: Cognitive response testing in measure development," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-13, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0151456. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.