Varady 2011.

Study characteristics
Methods	Multiple‐arm randomised clinical trial
Participants	60 participants based in the USA aged between 35 and 65 with a BMI between 25 and 39.9 kg/m2 Key inclusion criteria: BMI between 25 and 39.9 kg/m2; age 35 to 65 years; non‐diabetic; no history of cardiovascular disease; non‐smoker; weight stable (< 6 kg weight loss or gain for 3 months prior to the study); sedentary or lightly active (<3 hours/week of light intensity exercise for 3 months prior to the study); and not taking weight loss, lipid‐, or glucose‐lowering medications.
Interventions	4‐arm trial Intervention (n = 15): ADF (75% energy restriction for 24 hours alternated with ad libitum feeding for 24 hours) Comparator 1 ( n =15): CR (25% energy restriction every day), 3) exercise (moderate intensity training 3 x/week) Comparator 2 (n = 15): control A fourth arm which focused on exercise (moderate intensity training 3 x/week) was not included in the analysis
Outcomes	Body weight, lipid profile
Notes	Majority of outcomes presented as percentage change. Author was contacted to calculate absolute changes but no response. Funding: Departmental grant, Kinesiology and Nutrition, University of Illinois, Chicago Type of paper: full‐text publication ADF‐ alternate day fasting CR‐ calorie restriction
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Method of randomisation not stated.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not stated.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Since this trial was a dietary intervention study, it was not feasible for participants or all study personnel to be blinded to the group assignment
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Not stated.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Dropout rates per group not provided. It was stated: quote: "60 subjects commenced the study, with 49 completing the 12‐week trial"
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	High risk	Majority of outcomes presented as percentage change. Author was contacted to calculate absolute changes but no response.
Other bias	Low risk	Nothing to note.