Poster Topical Area: Obesity

Location: Hall D

Poster Board Number: 630

P23-003 - Do Weight Cycling, Age of Onset, Three Factor Eating Questionnaire, and Power of Food Scale Predict Initial Weight Loss in People with Obesity?

Sunday, Jun 10
8:00 AM – 6:00 PM

Objectives: Identifying predictors of early weight loss may have value in predicting longer-term success in weight loss programs. The Three Factor Eating Questionnaire (TFEQ) and the Power of Food Scale (PFS) are validated measures related to how a person interacts with their food environment. We examined if weight history variables (i.e. weight cycling history; WCH, age of onset of obesity; AOO), and baseline TFEQ or PFS scores predict body weight loss (BWL) and fat mass loss (FML) following a brief intervention.


Methods: Thirty-two subjects with obesity (19-60 yrs; 30-39.9kg/m2) participated in a 3-week calorie restriction intervention (1120 kcal/d) as part of a larger clinical trial. WCH, AOO, TFEQ subscale scores (dietary restraint, TFEQ-R; disinhibition, TFEQ-D; susceptibility to hunger, TFEQ-S), and PFS subscale scores (food available, PFS-FA; food present, PFS-FP; food tasted, PFS-FT) were obtained at baseline. Body weight (BW) and fat mass (FM) were measured at both baseline and post-intervention. Principle Component Analyses (PCA) were performed on TFEQ and PFS subscales. Multiple linear regression analyses were performed using weight history variables (WCH and AOO), TFEQ and PFS subscales to predict BWL and FML.


Results: PCA demonstrated good internal reliability of the TFEQ and PFS subscales, with PFS subscales presenting as more reliable than the TFEQ subscales. BW and FM decreased significantly (-3.71 kg, P=2e-8; -1.93 kg, P=3e-5). Baseline scores of TFEQ-R, TFEQ-D, TFEQ-S, PFS-FA, PFS-FP did not predict BWL (r= -.09, r= -.08, r= .01, r=-.25, and r= -.33, all P>.08 respectively) or FML (r= .12, r= -.27, r= -.27, r= .31, and r= .26, all P>.10 respectively). Baseline PFS-FT scores predicting BWL were significant (r= -.40, P= .03) and a trend was noted for the association between baseline PFS-FT and FML (r= -.36, P=.06), and between baseline PFS-FP and BWL (r=-.33, p=.09) in the original models, but not after controlling for familywise error. WCH and AOO did not predict BWL (P=.27, P=.31) or FML (P=.60, P=.30).


Conclusions: Psychological and weight history variables considered in this study were not robust predictors of weight and fat loss. However, results for at least the PFS suggest there may be value in further exploring this measure using larger sample sizes.




Funding Source: Nestle Health Science

CoAuthors: John Dawson, Ph.D. – Texas Tech University; Shao-Hua Chin – Texas Tech University ; Tyler Davis, Ph.D. – Texas Tech University; William Quarles – Texas Tech University; Wei-Lin Huang – Texas Tech University; Martin Binks, Ph.D. – Texas Tech University

Sharmin Akter

Graduate Student
Texas Tech University
Lubbock, Texas