9. Dietary intervention compared to usual care for people living beyond cancer: anthropometry outcomes.
| Dietary intervention compared to usual care for people living beyond cancer: anthropometry outcomes | ||||||
| Patient or population: people living beyond cancer Setting: community Intervention: dietary intervention Comparison: usual care | ||||||
| Outcomes | Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | № of participants (studies) | Certainty of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
| Risk with usual care | Risk with dietary intervention | |||||
| Weight/mean assessed as kg Follow‐up: 12 | Mean weight/mean was 81.94 kg | MD 0.8 kg lower (2.01 lower to 0.41 higher) | ‐ | 3287 (5 RCTs) | ⊕⊕⊕⊕ High | |
| Body mass index/mean assessed as kg/m² follow up: 12 | Mean body mass index/mean was 29.63 kg/m² | MD 0.79 kg/m² lower (1.5 lower to 0.07 lower) | ‐ | 777 (4 RCTs) | ⊕⊕⊕⊝ Moderatea | |
| Waist‐to‐hip ratio assessed as cm Follow‐up: 12 months | Mean waist‐to‐hip ratio was 0.46 cm | MD 0.01 cm lower (0.04 lower to 0.02 higher) | ‐ | 106 (2 RCTs) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ Lowb,c | |
| *The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: confidence interval; MD: mean difference; RCT: randomised controlled trial. | ||||||
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence. High‐certainty: we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect. Moderate‐certainty: we are moderately confident in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different. Low‐certainty: our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect. Very low‐certainty: we have very little confidence in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect. | ||||||
aDowngraded one level due to risk of bias assessment. bDowngraded one level for indirectness as studies included only Hispanic women. cDowngraded one level due to imprecision because of small sample size.