Digestery
Diet and food › Intermittent Fasting and Weight › Studies

Randomized trial · measured the question itself

12-week trial in 116 adults: 16:8 eating window did not clearly beat set meals

Lowe and colleagues · JAMA internal medicine · 2020

Original title: Effects of Time-Restricted Eating on Weight Loss and Other Metabolic Parameters in Women and Men With Overweight and Obesity: The TREAT Randomized Clinical Trial.

Under review. A person has not yet checked this summary against the paper. It is written from the PubMed abstract. Until a person checks it, search engines are asked not to list this page.

What the study found

No difference

Weight fell -0.94 kg with fasting and -0.68 kg with set meals; the gap was -0.26 kg (95% CI, -1.30 to 0.78; P = .63). Authors conclude it is not more effective than eating throughout the day.

The study at a glance

Type of study
Randomized trial
Who or what was studied
116 people · men and women aged 18 to 64 with BMI 27 to 43
What was tested
16:8 time restricted eating (eat noon to 8 pm) for 12 weeks, vs three set meals a day
What it measured
The question itself: weight loss, compared with ordinary calorie cutting
How long
12 weeks
Trial registration
NCT03637855, NCT03393195
Who has a stake
Company stake
Two authors report ties to Keyto, a weight-loss company; one co-founded it and holds equity.
Journal
JAMA internal medicine, 2020
Source
PubMed record 32986097. This page is based on the abstract only.

How much this study counts

  • ✓Randomized: people were put into groups by chance, so the groups start out alike.
  • •Medium size: 116 people.
  • •Lasted 12 weeks.
  • ✓Measured the question itself: weight loss, compared with ordinary calorie cutting.
  • –Company stake: Two authors report ties to Keyto, a weight-loss company; one co-founded it and holds equity.
  • •Summarized from the PubMed abstract only. The full paper may hold details the abstract leaves out.

✓ Strength– Limit• Note

These points come from fixed rules about the type of study, its size and length, what it measured, and who has a stake. Every study on Digestery gets the same rules.

Where this study sits

Each dot is one on-topic paper on this question. Steps near the top answer the question more directly.

↑ Stronger evidence

  1. Trials in people: weight loss

    9

    5 benefit, 2 mixed, 2 no difference

    ↑ This study is the ringed dot

  2. Trials in people: other measures

    8

    4 benefit, 3 mixed, 1 no difference

  3. Trials in people: lab tests or safety

    1

    1 benefit

  4. Population studies

    0

    None among the papers we read.

  5. Blood levels and genes

    0

    None among the papers we read.

↓ Weaker evidence

  • Points to benefit
  • Mixed
  • No difference
  • No direction
  • Points to harm

How it fits with the other research

The short answer to “Does intermittent fasting help with weight loss?”

Yes, but about like calorie cutting.

Confidence: moderate. Based on 26 on-topic papers.

Read the full answer

Of the other 8 papers on the same step: 5 benefit, 2 mixed, 1 no difference. This one found no difference. It differs from most of them.

Other papers on the same step

See all 26 studies on this question

How this page was made

Label

First read of the abstract
Claude Sonnet
Independent second read
Claude Haiku
Differences settled
The two reads agreed on every checked field. Claude Opus 5.5.
Headline
Claude Sonnet, from the checked study record. A script checked its numbers and wording.
Numbers
Checked against the abstract by a script
“How much this study counts”
Fixed rules, the same for every study
Source check by a person
Not yet. Required before search engines may list this page.

Spot an error? Email a flag with a link to your source, or use the form on the question page.