A critique on using body weight as a primary outcome measure

Abstract

A mixed-methods study was conducted to evaluate the feasibility of implementing a web-based dietary-focused weight loss intervention (i.e. POWeR-RN) for people with excess weight, most of who were physically active prior to the introduction of POWeR-RN (Garip & Yardley, 2013). The primary outcome measures for evaluating the efficacy of the POWeR-RN intervention were participants’ (n = 43) body mass index (weight and height) and waist circumference, measured objectively at baseline and 12-weeks later. Overall usage of the POWeR-RN intervention was low, with 1.5 sessions accessed on average, out of a possible 11 sessions. A critique is presented of triangulating participants’ (n = 21) views, experiences (Garip, Morton, Bridger, & Yardley, 2014), and usage of the POWeR-RN intervention on how using body weight as a primary outcome measure may negatively influence people with excess weight who are physically active. In light of the literature on the relationship between physical fitness, weight, and morbidity/mortality (Fogelholm, 2009; Lee, Artero, Sui, & Blair, 2010), health psychologists could develop interventions that focus on improving cardio-respiratory fitness, and retreat from using weight as a primary outcome measure.