Table 2.

Sustained Weight Loss and Reported Weight

Assessment	Total	Control	Promotion	Prevention	P-Value
Sustained Weight Loss
Intent-to-treat cases
N	120	39	41	40
Month 1	118 (98%)	37 (95%)	41 (100%)	40 (100%)	.10a
Month 3	114 (95%)	35 (90%)	39 (95%)	40 (100%)	.08b
Evaluable cases
N	89	29	31	29
Month 1	87 (98%)	27 (93%)	31 (100%)	29 (100%)	.21a
N	102	33	37	32
Month 3	96 (94%)	29 (88%)	35 (95%)	32 (100%)	.13a
Reported weight, in lbs.
Adjusted means (n)	120	39	41	40	.99a
Baseline	247.5 ± 61.3	239.6 ± 50.6	250.2 ± 67.7	252.3 ± 64.7
Month 1	235.0 ± 59.4	232.2 ± 51.0	240.3 ± 64.8	242.5 ± 62.1
Month 3	234.3 ± 57.9	229.7 ± 52.1	235.3 ± 62.4	237.9 ± 59.8
Unadjusted means
Baseline	247.5 ± 61.8	239.6 ± 50.4	250.2 ± 68.2	252.3 ± 65.6
Month 1	235.0 ± 59.5	226.7 ± 47.9	234.2 ± 62.8	244.1 ± 66.7
Month 3	232.6 ± 60.1	227.2 ± 51.6	232.7 ± 64.3	237.9 ± 64.5

N = Number of participants with weight data; sustained weight loss presented as n (%) of N. Reported weight summarized using the mean ± SD. Adjusted means are based on estimated trajectory scores at each assessment derived from the random coefficients regression model for repeated measurements, while the unadjusted means are provided for the evaluable cases. The P-values for sustained weight loss are based on the overall 2 × 3 Fisher’s exact test at each assessment, while the P-value for weight are for the group-by-time² interactions evaluated using random coefficients regression models for repeated measurements. A priori pairwise comparisons results were as follows:

^a: control = promotion = prevention;

^b: promotion = control, prevention > control, promotion = prevention.