Skip to main content
Download PDF
Download ePub

Comparing caloric restriction regimens for effective weight management in adults: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity volume 21, Article number: 108 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Randomized controlled trials have confirmed the effectiveness of four prevalent caloric restriction regimens in reducing obesity-related health risks. However, there is no consensus on the optimal regimen for weight management in adults.

Methods

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL up to January 15, 2024, for randomized controlled trials (RCT) involving adults, evaluating the weight-loss effects of alternate day fasting (ADF), short-term fasting (STF), time-restricted eating (TRE), and continuous energy restriction (CER). The primary outcome was body weight, with secondary outcomes including BMI, fat mass, lean mass, waist circumference, fasting glucose, HOMA-IR, and adverse events. Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted, ranking regimens using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve and the probability of being the best. Study quality was assessed using the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis tool.

Results

Data from 47 RCTs (representing 3363 participants) were included. ADF showed the most significant body weight loss (Mean difference (MD): -3.42; 95% Confidence interval (CI): -4.28 to -2.55), followed by TRE (MD: -2.25; 95% CI: -2.92 to -1.59). STF (MD: -1.87; 95% CI: -3.32 to -0.56) and CER (MD: -1.59; 95% CI: -2.42 to -0.79) rank third and fourth, respectively. STF lead to decline in lean mass (MD: -1.26; 95% CI: -2.16, -0.47). TRE showed benefits on fasting glucose (MD: -2.98; 95% CI: -4.7, -1.26). Subgroup analysis revealed all four caloric restriction regimens likely lead to modest weight loss after 1–3 months, with ADF ranked highest, but by 4–6 months, varying degrees of weight regain occur, particularly with CER, while interventions lasting 7–12 months may result in effective weight loss, with TRE potentially ranking first during both the 4–6 months and 7–12 months periods. ADF showing fewer and shorter-lasting physical symptoms.

Conclusion

All four included regiments were effective in reducing body weight, with ADF likely having the most significant impact. Each regimen likely leads to modest weight loss after 1–3 months, followed by weight regain by 4–6 months. However, interventions lasting 7–12 months achieve greater weight loss overall.

Trial registration

PROSPERO: CRD42022382478.

Background

Overweight and obesity significantly elevate the risk of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) [1, 2], encompassing cardiovascular diseases (such as hypertension, myocardial infarction, and stroke) [3, 4], metabolic diseases (including type 2 diabetes mellitus and fatty liver disease) [5], musculoskeletal ailments (like osteoarthritis) [6], and digestive system cancers (comprising esophagus, stomach, pancreas, liver, and colon) [7,8,9]. These NCDs account for more than 70% of premature deaths worldwide and stand as a primary cause of disability [10]. Over the past four decades, obesity prevalence has doubled in over 70 countries and continues to escalate in most others [11]. Projections from the World Obesity Federation indicate that without enhancements in prevention and treatment, over 4 billion individuals (equivalent to 51% of the global population) will grapple with overweight or obesity by 2035, resulting in an annual global economic burden of $4.32 trillion [12]. Fortunately, weight loss interventions have demonstrated efficacy in reducing blood pressure, glucose levels, blood lipids, and the risk of both cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality [13].

Lifestyle interventions, encompassing caloric restriction, physical activity, and behavioral therapy, constitute cornerstones in the clinical management of obesity [14]. Pharmacotherapy or bariatric surgery is recommended for individuals inadequately responsive to these lifestyle interventions [14, 15]. Caloric restrictions are integral facets of these lifestyle interventions and can be classified into four common regimens [16]: Continuous Energy Restriction (CER, entailing a daily energy intake reduction of 20–30% from daily requirements), short-term fasting (STF, involving limiting daily energy intake to approximately 25% on either 2–3 consecutive or non-consecutive days of the week), Alternate Day Fasting (ADF, comprising consuming 20–30% of daily energy needs on fasting days and consuming 100% of daily energy needs or ad libitum on non-fasting days), and Time-Restricted Eating (TRE, characterized by consuming within a daily window of less than 12 h). These latter three regimens collectively fall under the umbrella of Intermittent Energy Restriction (IER).

The optimal regimen for weight loss remains uncertain. An umbrella review of meta-analyses favored IER, particularly the ADF regimen, for overweight or obese adults [17]. Another meta-analysis suggested that the weight loss effects of IER were comparable to CER [18]. Conversely, Templeman et al. [19] found that the ADF regimen was less effective in reducing body fat mass compared to matched CER. Lowe et al. [20], in a three-week randomized controlled trial (RCT), observed the effectiveness of the TRE program for weight loss, albeit with lean mass loss instead of fat mass. Laurens et al. [21] reported that protein loss primarily occurred in the early stages of the CER regimen but diminished as ketogenesis increased.

Identifying the most effective, low-side-effect caloric restriction strategy holds promise for reducing the incidence of NCDs and alleviating the associated healthcare burden. To date, existing systematic reviews and meta-analyses have conducted pairwise comparisons, such as STF versus CER [22], IER versus CER [23], and STF versus CER [24, 25]. However, these studies have not yielded conclusive evidence regarding the optimal regimen. To address these gaps, we conducted a network meta-analysis that estimates the relative effects of the four commonly used caloric restriction strategies by incorporating both direct comparisons (from head-to-head trials) and indirect comparisons (through a common comparator). Additionally, we noticed variations in outcome measures across different intervention durations in RCTs. Therefore, we performed subgroup analyses based on intervention duration. This study aims to elucidate the effectiveness, sustainability, and safety of these calorie restriction regimens, helping healthcare professionals and individuals seeking weight loss to make more informed decisions.

Methods

This study adhered to the PRISMA for Network Meta-Analyses (PRISMA-NMA) guidelines [26] and followed the standard methodology recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration [27]. The study protocol was prospectively registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) under the code CRD42022382478.

Inclusion criteria

We applied the PICOS model [28] (Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, and Study Design) to define the inclusion criteria: (1) Population: Adults ≥ 18 years with stable weight (loss or gain < 5 kg in the past 3 months). (2) Interventions: Evaluated CER, STF, ADF, and TRE, with no calorie restriction. (3) Comparisons: General diet without time or calorie restrictions. (4) Outcomes: Primary outcome: changes in body weight (kg); Secondary outcomes: BMI (kg/m2), fat mass (kg), lean mass (kg), waist circumference (cm), fasting glucose (mg/dL), Homeostatic Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR), and adverse events. (5) Study design: Published RCTs with ≥ 4 weeks intervention, no language or publication year restrictions.

Exclusion criteria

(1) Use of weight-loss medications/supplements, surgeries, pregnancy, lactation, significant endocrinopathies (e.g., diabetes, thyroid disease), cancer, chronic diseases needing dietary control (e.g., heart, and liver disease, chronic nephrosis, chronic diarrheal disease), steroids, or immunosuppressants within 3 months. (2) Excluded studies < 4 weeks, religious fasts (e.g., Muslim Ramadan fasting and Greek Orthodox fasting), and those limiting dietary components (e.g., low-carbohydrate diets). (3) Excluded inaccessible full-text articles or studies with overlapping data, even after reasonable attempts to contact corresponding authors.

Literature search

We conducted a comprehensive literature search to identify relevant RCTs published from the inception of the databases up to January 15, 2024. This search utilized a combination of four databases: PubMed, Embase (Ovid), Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), using terms such as "intermittent fasting," "calorie restriction," "time-restricted eating," "alternate day fasting," and their derivatives. A detailed list of the search strategy is available in Supplemental Material 1. Following the database search, Three independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts, and conducted a full-text assessment of relevant articles, resolving any disagreements through discussion. two of these reviewers then examined reference lists of included studies to identify additional relevant studies.

Quality assessment

Two reviewers independently assessed the risk of bias of the included studies using the Cochrane Handbook’s Risk of Bias Assessment Tool [29] and resolved disagreements through consultation and discussion with a third reviewer. Publication bias was assessed using funnel plots. The Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) tool [30, 31] was employed to assess the quality of evidence in six domains, including within-study bias, across-studies bias, indirectness, imprecision, heterogeneity, and incoherence.

Data extraction

Data extraction underwent a rigorous process with two independent reviewers employing a standardized electronic form. Oversight by a third author ensured statistical rigor. Extracted data included publication year, study period, baseline population characteristics, intervention specifics, duration of intervention and follow-up, relative study quality parameters, and primary and secondary outcomes (mean and standard deviation [SD] of change scores between post-intervention and baseline measurements). In cases where multiple studies reported results from the same subjects, inclusion prioritization followed guidelines favoring the study with the most comprehensive data, the most recent publication date, or the highest methodological quality based on the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Finally, we assessed the network geometry by constructing diagrams that visually represented direct comparisons between interventions, with node sizes and edge thicknesses indicating the number and distribution of studies.

Data synthesis and statistical analysis

Network meta-analysis was conducted using R 4.2.2 software with the 'gemtc' package in RStudio, employing Bayesian frameworks alongside Markov Chain Monte Carlo simulations. The estimation process included 25,000 burn-in iterations and 50,000 sampling iterations across four chains initialized with different values. Model selection was based on the deviance information criterion, with a significant difference in consistency test results considered when the deviance information criterion exceeded 5. Next, we calculated intervention rankings using the Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking Curve (SUCRA) and the Probability of Being the Best (Prbest) in R 4.2.2. Higher SUCRA and Prbest scores indicate a greater likelihood of a regimen occupying a top position [26]. Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran's Q statistic and I2 values, classifying I2 < 50% as low heterogeneity and I2 ≥ 50% as high heterogeneity.

Network plots were generated in CINeMA framework and STATA 15.0 to visualize intervention relationships, with node size reflecting group sample sizes and edge width representing the number of studies.

Subsequently, data were categorized into 1–3 month, 4–6 month, and 7–12 month periods for subgroup analysis, and the above steps were repeated.

Results

Study selection

Initially, a total of 7300 potential records were identified through database searches. Furthermore, an additional 27 potentially eligible records were extracted from the reference lists of relevant reviews. This process culminated in the comprehensive evaluation of 395 full-text articles for eligibility. Subsequently, 47 RCTs [20, 32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77] met the inclusion criteria and were integrated into this systematic review and quantitative synthesis network meta-analysis, as depicted in Fig. 1 (PRISMA Flow Diagram).

Fig. 1
figure 1

PRISMA flowchart

Full size image

Study characteristics

We included 47 articles involving a total of 3363 participants (Table 1). All studies were conducted as single-center RCTs. Among these participants, 69.04% were female, and over 58.49% were classified as overweight or obese. The distribution of studies among the four caloric intervention regimens was as follows: 24 for CER, 24 for TRE, 15 for ADF, and nine for STF. Regarding the duration of interventions, 40 studies reported results for the 1–3 month period, eight reported outcomes for the 4–6 month period, and six reported outcomes for the 7–12 month period. Furthermore, four studies incorporated individuals engaged in regular exercise [33, 58, 72, 73], and an additional three studies involved participants with insulin resistance but without a diabetes diagnosis [38, 45, 63].

Table 1 Characteristics of studies
Full size table

We conducted a network comparison involving CER, STF, ADF, and TRE, establishing connections between these regimens by linking direct comparisons from the included studies, which also allow for indirect comparisons between interventions that were not directly compared (Fig. 2 and Fig. S1-2). Certainty of evidence results can be found in Fig. S6-12.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Network Plot Illustrating Body Weight Change Comparisons for Network Analysis. Each circular node represents a type of regimen, with circle size proportional to the total number of studies. Line width signifies sample size in head-to-head comparisons. Red, yellow, and green denote high, medium, and low risk of bias, respectively. ADF: Alternate Day Fasting; TRE: Time-Restricted Eating; CER: Continuous Energy Restriction; STF: Short-Term Fasting

Full size image

Primary outcomes

Overall analysis

The network meta-analysis revealed that all caloric restriction regimens resulted in significant weight loss compared to the general diet, as illustrated in Table 2 and Fig. 3. Among these regimens, ADF demonstrated the most substantial weight loss effect (moderate-certainty evidence), surpassing TRE, STF, and CER with statistical significance (high- to low-certainty evidence). However, no significant differences were observed among TRE, STF, and CER (low- to very low-certainty evidence). Figure 3A presents the forest plot depicting the overall comparisons among the investigated regimens. This finding was further supported by the SUCRA analysis, positioning ADF in the highest position of the first quartile, as depicted in Fig. 4A.

Table 2 Pairwise comparisons of absolute changes in body weight
Full size table
Fig. 3
figure 3

Forest plot showing comparisons among different caloric restriction regimens: A Overall Body Weight Change; Subgroup Network Meta-Analyses for B 1–3 month, C 4–6 month, and D 7–12 month periods. Regimen comparisons are sorted by efficacy. ADF: Alternate Day Fasting, TRE: Time-Restricted Eating, CER: Continuous Energy Restriction, STF: Short-Term Fasting, CI: Credible Interval

Full size image
Fig. 4
figure 4

Ranking plot depicting the efficacy of caloric restriction regimens in weight loss: A Overall Ranking; Subgroup Analyses for B 1–3 month, C 4–6 month, and D 7–12 month Interventions. Strategies are plotted on the X-axis based on Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking Curve Analysis (SUCRA), with 1.00 indicating the best strategy and 0 representing the worst. The Y-axis displays the rank probability of the best strategy, with a score of 1 assigned to the top weight loss strategy. ADF: Alternate Day Fasting, TRE: Time-Restricted Eating, CER: Continuous Energy Restriction, STF: Short-Term Fasting

Full size image

Subgroup analyses

We present detailed mean changes in body weight along with 95% CIs for subgroup analyses based on different durations in Table 2.

The subgroup network meta-analysis conducted caloric restriction for 1–3 months revealed that all caloric restriction regimens significantly contributed to weight loss. ADF exhibited superior weight loss effects compared to CER and TRE at 1–3 months (low-certainty evidence) (Table 2), while no statistically significant differences were observed between ADF and STF (moderate-certainty evidence). Figure 3B displays the forest plot illustrating the comparisons across the investigated regimens at 1–3 months. The SUCRA analysis confirmed the findings of the 1–3 month subgroup analysis, positioning the ADF regimen in the first quartile alongside STF (Fig. 4B).

In the 4–6 month period, subgroup network meta-analysis revealed that, except for STF, all other three regimens were effective compared to the general diet (high- to low-certainty evidence) (Table 2, Fig. 3C). However, among the three regimens, no statistically significant advantage was observed (low- to very low-certainty evidence).

Due to the limited data available, the findings regarding weight changes within the 7–12 month period were inconclusive compared to previous results. However, where feasible, the SUCRA values ranked TRE as the most likely effective option for sustained weight loss exceeding three months instead of ADF (Fig. 4 C-D). Nevertheless, the 4–6 month subgroup analysis revealed no statistically significant differences between any intervention and the general diet (high- to low-certainty evidence) (Table 2), suggesting that all weight loss strategies may be associated with weight regain during this period.

According to Fig. 5, all caloric restriction regimens showed weight loss effects at the 1–3 month time point compared to baseline measurements. However, in studies with durations of 4–6 months, weight regain was observed across all interventions. Notably, TRE exhibited relatively smaller magnitudes of weight regain compared to the other interventions. The results from the 7–12 month period revealed a trend toward weight loss; however, only ADF and TRE showed statistically significant results (high- to moderate-certainty evidence).

Fig. 5
figure 5

Weight change trends of four caloric restriction regimens over different durations

Full size image

Secondary outcomes

Detailed comparative effects with 95% CIs for the overall network meta-analysis are presented in Table S1. Subgroup network meta-analyses are provided in Tables S2-4. The forest plot illustrating the overall comparisons can be found in Fig. 6. SUCRA values are reported in Tables S5-6. Due to insufficient data availability, 4–6 month and 7–12 month subgroup analyses were partially unfeasible.

Fig. 6
figure 6

Forest plot showing overall comparisons among different caloric restriction regimens for secondary outcomes: A BMI; B Fat Mass; C Lean Mass; D Waist Circumference; E Fasting Glucose; and F HOMA-IR. Regimen comparisons are organized by efficacy. ADF: Alternate Day Fasting, TRE: Time-Restricted Eating, CER: Continuous Energy Restriction, STF: Short-Term Fasting, HOMA-IR: Homeostatic Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance, CI: Credible Interval

Full size image

BMI

The overall network meta-analysis demonstrated the efficacy of all regimens in reducing BMI compared to general diet, (moderate- to very low-certainty evidence) (Fig. 6 and Table S1). In the 1–3 month period (Table S2), ADF exhibited significantly greater effectiveness compared to CER, TRE, and STF (moderate- to very low-certainty evidence), while there were no statistically significant differences observed among CER, TRE, and STF when compared to each other (high- to very low-certainty evidence). The SUCRA rankings positioned ADF first in overall and 1–3 month analyses, with TRE leading in the 7–12 months (refer to Table S5).

Fat mass

Both overall (Fig. 6, Table S1) and 1–3 month subgroup analyses (Table S2) demonstrated that all regimens were associated with a reduction in fat mass compared to general diet (moderate- to very low-certainty evidence). However, 4–6 month and 7–12 month subgroup analyses found no significant effectiveness for any regimen (moderate- to very low-certainty evidence) Nonetheless, TRE still emerged as relatively the most effective in 7–12 month interventions (moderate- to low-certainty evidence), as indicated by SUCRA values (Table S5).

Lean mass

In both the overall (Fig. 6, Table S1) and 1–3 month (Table S2) network meta-analysis, STF was associated with the most significant lean mass loss (high-certainty evidence), followed by TRE (low-certainty evidence) (Table S6) ( both are statistically significant).

Waist circumference

Both overall (Fig. 6, Table S1) and 1–3 month subgroup (Table S2) analyses indicated the efficacy of IER approaches, including ADF, TRE, and STF, in reducing waist circumference (moderate- to low-certainty evidence), while CER regimens did not show significance (very low-certainty evidence). ADF outperformed STF, according to SUCRA values in the 1–3 month period, while TRE remained the most effective in the 7–12 month period (Table S6). Similar to Fat mass outcomes, 4–6 month and 7–12 month analyses found no significant effectiveness for any regimen (moderate- to very low-certainty evidence).

Fasting glucose

Compared to the general diet, only TRE significantly reduced fasting blood glucose levels in the 1–3 month period (low-certainty evidence) (Table S2) and its highest ranking in SUCRA (Table S6). However, no regimen proved effective in the 4–6 month and 7–12 month period (moderate- to very low-certainty evidence) (Tables S3-4).

HOMA-IR

No significant difference was observed in reversing insulin resistance between all caloric restriction regimens and the general diet (very low-certainty evidence) (Fig. 6, Table S1-2).

Adverse events

Sixteen studies reported adverse events [34, 35, 38, 39, 46, 47, 55, 57, 61, 62, 66, 68, 70, 73, 75, 76]. Among them, four trials [34, 35, 57, 73] documented no adverse events throughout the intervention period. Participants in other studies experienced mild to moderate physical symptoms, which are outlined in Table 3, and no instances of serious adverse events were reported.

Table 3 Adverse events during the caloric restriction period
Full size table

Quality of evidence

Figure 7 depicts the weighted plot assessing the overall risk of bias across domains, while Fig. S3 illustrates a traffic light plot. All studies were deemed to have a high risk of performance bias (100%) due to the impracticality of blinding participants to the nature of the interventions. Approximately 61.7% of the RCTs exhibited a low risk of bias concerning the randomization process. Concerns regarding bias during the allocation concealment were noted in 24 studies (51.1%),in 27 studies (57.4%) for blinding during outcome assessment, and in 29 studies (61.7%) for the process of blinding during outcome assessment. Additionally, bias concerns were identified in 37 studies (78.7%) for selective reporting and in 24 studies (51.1%) for other sources of bias. Among the 47 RCTs, 12 (25.5%) were at high risk of attribution bias related to outcome measurement, six (12.8%) due to significant dropout rates, three (6.4%) due to insufficient reporting of population dropout information, and three (6.4%) RCTs were flagged for inappropriate handling of missing data.

Fig. 7
figure 7

Weighted plot for the assessment of the overall risk of bias via the Cochrane Handbook’s Risk of Bias assessment tool

Full size image

The certainty of evidence regarding its impact on each outcomes was assessed using the CINeMA system (Fig. S6-12).

Discussion

In adults requiring weight loss, whether overweight or obese, the four caloric restriction regimens show high certainty of the 1–3 month period evidence for weight reduction, resulting in an average weight loss of 1.71–3.34 kg, consistent with two comprehensive systematic reviews [78, 79]. Among these regimens, ADF and TRE demonstrate relative advantages in reducing weight and BMI, with high to moderate certainty. High-quality evidence demonstrates that the STF likely lead to the most pronounced decline in lean mass while reducing weight, consistent with an umbrella review of overweight patients [80]. Moderate to low certainty evidence suggests that caloric restriction regimens may have some impact on fat mass and fasting blood glucose reduction. Limited evidence suggests that caloric restriction regimens may have little or no utility in improving insulin sensitivity, failing to provide convincing evidence of benefit.

Our study encompasses multiple outcome measures and further conducts subgroup analyses on duration while summarizing adverse reactions. ADF effectively reduces weight, BMI, fat mass, and waist circumference, consistent with several systematic reviews [25, 81, 82] and Elortegui et al.'s [82] network meta-analysis. Our findings align with Park et al.'s report [81] of improved fasting blood glucose within 6 months with lower weight regain risk compared to CER. Although our analysis did not reveal significant differences in fasting blood glucose and insulin resistance compared to the general diet group, favorable trends toward ADF were observed. This trend is consistent with Trepanowski et al.'s findings [74], which also observed improvements in plasma lipids with ADF at 6 months. Furthermore, ADF shows fewer, shorter-lasting, and less frequent side effects compared to alternative regimens.

The STF regimen, also known as the 5:2 diet in many studies [39, 48, 79, 80, 82], has gained attention as a relatively novel caloric restriction strategy for its effectiveness in weight loss over 1–3 months and the improvement of cardiovascular metabolic risk factors [70, 80]. However, our study suggests that it may not necessarily outperform other strategies. Our findings indicate that while STF achieves significant weight loss, this substantial reduction in lean mass could be considered its primary drawback, a conclusion supported by previous research [80, 83]. Moreover, STF is associated with a higher incidence of adverse effects, attributed to its characteristic prolonged fasting periods, particularly in the case of the “consecutive 2 days fasting” diet regimen, which restricts energy intake to approximately 25% for up to 48 h, explaining the prevalence of common symptoms such as hunger and constipation. Prolonged fasting is also linked to an increased risk of adverse events affecting the nervous and gastrointestinal systems (see Table 3). Despite some interveners self-suggesting a connection between these adverse reactions and a decrease in the intake of weight-loss-promoting foods, the incidence of weight regain remains elevated within STF framework [70]. Furthermore, recent basic research indicates that prolonged fasting may lead to decreased monocyte circulation and compromised immune function, thereby increasing susceptibility to infections [84]. These findings raise concerns regarding potential health implications of STF. Some studies have explored combining fasting with exercise, including resistance training, reporting the effectiveness of preserving [32, 85, 86] or even increasing [73] lean body mass while achieving weight loss simultaneously, yet the reliability of this evidence remains insufficient for conclusive determination.

TRE regimen decreased fasting blood glucose levels in the 1–3 month and 4–6 month period, albeit with lower certainty, but exhibit limited 7–12 month efficacy, correlating with trends in weight management, while their impact on improving insulin resistance remains inconclusive. Some studies indicate that IER, including TRE, can reduce HOMA-IR and fasting insulin levels in overweight individuals or those with metabolic syndrome [87,88,89]. Furthermore, TRE demonstrates beneficial effects on cardiovascular metabolic parameters [87, 90] and lipid profiles [76, 83, 87]. Overall, patients with higher baseline risks (e.g., diagnosed diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia) may derive the greater absolute benefit [79, 91, 92]. Recent high-quality research suggests that early initiation of TRE, restricting food intake to earlier parts of the day, may enhance insulin sensitivity more effectively than starting TRE from midday to evening, thereby reducing inflammation and promoting gut microbiota diversity [19], preventing excessive fat accumulation, and restoring cholesterol homeostasis through modulation of clock-related gene expression [22]. Thus, the timing and duration of fasting appear crucial for regulating glucose and lipid metabolism. However, a recent preliminary research presented at the American Heart Association’s Epidemiology and Prevention│Lifestyle and Cardiometabolic Scientific Sessions 2024 emphasized that While TRE may offer benefits in the 1–3 month period, it may not be conducive to long-term health. Individuals following a 16 + 8 TRE regimen were found to have a 96% significantly increased risk of dying from cardiovascular disease in the long term [93]. Nevertheless, considering the limitations of current evidence, further clinical research is warranted to comprehensively understand these effects.

Weight regain is a common occurrence across all four fasting regimens within the 4–6 month timeframe, with this regain nearly counteracting the initial weight loss and leading to a restoration of weight to levels close to baseline (Fig. 5). Decreased adherence to dietary protocols exert a influence on this phenomenon [94]. Complex physiological mechanisms, including various hormonal regulations and metabolic adaptations [95], further complicate the maintenance of weight loss during this period. Fasting may affect weight control by altering the composition of the gut microbiota [76, 96], while reciprocal interactions among gut microbes can also re-regulate metabolism processes [97]. Additionally, adipose tissue plays a critical role in weight regulation, influenced by factors such as cellular stress, inflammation, extracellular matrix alterations, and adiponectin secretion [97, 98]. These processes are intricately linked to the interactions between immune cells and adipocyte stroma cells [99]. Furthermore, non-physiological factors also significantly impact weight management. Emotional influences, environmental cues, and behavioral patterns may all contribute to weight regain after successful weight loss. For example, psychological stress may lead to overeating or a return to unhealthy dietary habits, thereby facilitating weight regain [100]. Environmental factors, such as the availability of high-calorie foods and sedentary lifestyles, may also present challenges to maintaining a healthy weight [101].

Limitations

The limitations of our study are primarily influenced by the existing evidence. Firstly, concerns about the overall risk of bias arise due to the lack of adequate blinding, small sample sizes in many included studies, and high dropout rates in some studies. Secondly, the absence of data for the 4–6 month and 7–12 month periods in most studies notably reduces the synthesis accuracy of subgroup effects, resulting in lower evidence grades for these durations. Thirdly, the lack of specific BMI inclusion criteria in most studies makes subgroup analysis challenging across normal weight, overweight, and obese populations, given the diverse characteristics of the study populations. Fourthly, while SUCRA primarily provides rankings of interventions, it does not offer precise estimates of effect size or consider study quality.

Conclusions

For adults, all four caloric restriction regimens demonstrated effective body weight loss. ADF may be the most effective in reducing body weight as well as BMI, waist circumference, fat mass, and insulin resistance. TRE appears to be relatively more effective in lowering fasting glucose, while STF may lead to the most lean mass loss.

After 1–3 months of intervention, all four caloric restriction regimens likely result in modest body weight loss, with ADF ranked first. However, by 4–6 months, varying degrees of body weight regain are observed across all regimens, with CER potentially experiencing the most significant weight rebound. Interventions lasting 7–12 months may lead to effective weight loss across all regimens. TRE may potentially rank first during both the 4–6 months and 7–12 months.

Further research is needed to focus on the long-term effects of different caloric restriction regimens on specific populations, such as those who are overweight, obese, diabetic, or have polycystic ovary syndrome. It is essential to thoroughly assess the various metabolic benefits, side effects, and the sustainability of weight loss for each regimens.

Availability of data and materials

Data (including the extracted contents from the searched articles) are available upon reasonable request from Dr. Jinming Huang; mail: dr.huangjinming@foxmail.com.

Abbreviations

ADF:

Alternate day fasting

TRE:

Time-restricted eating

CER:

Continuous energy restriction

STF:

Short-term fasting

BMI:

Body mass index

HOMA-IR:

Homeostatic Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance

SUCRA:

Surface under the cumulative ranking curve

Prbest:

Probability of being the best

CINeMA:

Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis

NCDs:

Non-communicable diseases

IER:

Intermittent energy restriction

PROSPERO:

Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews

CENTRAL:

Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials

MD:

Mean differences

CIs:

95% Confidence intervals

References

  1. Bluher M. Obesity: global epidemiology and pathogenesis. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2019;15(5):288–98.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Organization WH. Noncommunicable diseases progress monitor, 2017. 2017. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-NMH-NVI-17.9.

  3. Lavallée PC, Charles H, Albers GW, Caplan LR, Donnan GA, Ferro JM, et al. Effect of atherosclerosis on 5-year risk of major vascular events in patients with transient ischaemic attack or minor ischaemic stroke: an international prospective cohort study. Lancet Neurol. 2023;22(4):320–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ingelsson E, Sullivan LM, Fox CS, Murabito JM, Benjamin EJ, Polak JF, et al. Burden and prognostic importance of subclinical cardiovascular disease in overweight and obese individuals. Circulation. 2007;116(4):375–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Hoffman DJ, Powell TL, Barrett ES, Hardy DB. Developmental origins of metabolic diseases. Physiol Rev. 2021;101(3):739–95.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Guglielmo D, Hootman JM, Murphy LB, Boring MA, Theis KA, Belay B, et al. Health Care Provider Counseling for Weight Loss Among Adults with Arthritis and Overweight or Obesity - United States, 2002–2014. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2018;67(17):485–90.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Haslam DW, James WP. Obesity Lancet. 2005;366(9492):1197–209.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. McWilliams RR, Petersen GM. Overweight, obesity, and pancreatic cancer: beyond risk alone. JAMA. 2009;301(24):2592–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Sung H, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Pearson-Stuttard J, Islami F, Fedewa SA, et al. Global patterns in excess body weight and the associated cancer burden. CA: Canc J Clin. 2019;69(2):88–112.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Organization WH. Noncommunicable diseases: Mortality. Available from: https://www.who.int/data/gho/data/themes/topics/topic-details/GHO/ncd-mortality.

  11. Bovet P, Chiolero A, Gedeon J. Health Effects of Overweight and Obesity in 195 Countries. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(15):1495–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Federation WO. Economic impact of overweight and obesity to surpass $4 trillion by 2035. 2023. Available from: https://www.worldobesity.org/news/economic-impact-of-overweight-and-obesity-to-surpass-4-trillion-by-2035.

  13. Ma C, Avenell A, Bolland M, Hudson J, Stewart F, Robertson C, et al. Effects of weight loss interventions for adults who are obese on mortality, cardiovascular disease, and cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2017;359:j4849.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Kahan S. Overweight and obesity management strategies. Am J Manag Care. 2016;22(7 Suppl):s186–96.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ames GE, Maynard JR, Collazo-Clavell ML, Clark MM, Grothe KB, Elli EF. Rethinking Patient and Medical Professional Perspectives on Bariatric Surgery as a Medically Necessary Treatment. Mayo Clin Proc. 2020;95(3):527–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Koppold DA, Breinlinger C, Hanslian E, Kessler C, Cramer H, Khokhar AR, et al. International consensus on fasting terminology. Cell Metab. 2024;36(8):1779-94.e4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Patikorn C, Roubal K, Veettil SK, Chandran V, Pham T, Lee YY, et al. Intermittent Fasting and Obesity-Related Health Outcomes: An Umbrella Review of Meta-analyses of Randomized Clinical Trials. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4(12):e2139558.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Schwingshackl L, Zähringer J, Nitschke K, Torbahn G, Lohner S, Kühn T, et al. Impact of intermittent energy restriction on anthropometric outcomes and intermediate disease markers in patients with overweight and obesity: systematic review and meta-analyses. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2021;61(8):1293–304.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Templeman I, Smith HA, Chowdhury E, Chen YC, Carroll H, Johnson-Bonson D, et al. A randomized controlled trial to isolate the effects of fasting and energy restriction on weight loss and metabolic health in lean adults. Sci Transl Med. 2021;13(598):eabd8034.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Lowe DA, Wu N, Rohdin-Bibby L, Moore AH, Kelly N, Liu YE, et al. Effects of Time-Restricted Eating on Weight Loss and Other Metabolic Parameters in Women and Men With Overweight and Obesity: The TREAT Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2020;180(11):1491–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Laurens C, Grundler F, Damiot A, Chery I, Le Maho AL, Zahariev A, et al. Is muscle and protein loss relevant in long-term fasting in healthy men? A prospective trial on physiological adaptations. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2021;12(6):1690–703.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Wang X, Li Q, Liu Y, Jiang H, Chen W. Intermittent fasting versus continuous energy-restricted diet for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and metabolic syndrome for glycemic control: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2021;179:109003.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Wang J, Wang F, Chen H, Liu L, Zhang S, Luo W, et al. Comparison of the effects of intermittent energy restriction and continuous energy restriction among adults with overweight or obesity: an overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Nutrients. 2022;14(11):2315.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Zhang Q, Zhang C, Wang H, Ma Z, Liu D, Guan X, et al. Intermittent fasting versus continuous calorie restriction: which is better for weight loss? Nutrients. 2022;14(9):1781.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. He S, Wang J, Zhang J, Xu J. Intermittent Versus Continuous Energy Restriction for Weight Loss and Metabolic Improvement: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review. Obesity (Silver Spring, Md). 2021;29(1):108–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Hutton B, Salanti G, Caldwell DM, Chaimani A, Schmid CH, Cameron C, et al. The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: checklist and explanations. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162(11):777–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li TJ, Page MJ, et al. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. John Wiley & Sons. 2019;10(10):ED000142.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Atkins D, Brozek J, Vist G, et al. GRADE guidelines: 2. Framing the question and deciding on important outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(4):395–400.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gotzsche PC, Juni P, Moher D, Oxman AD, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2011;343:d5928.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Nikolakopoulou A, Higgins JPT, Papakonstantinou T, Chaimani A, Del Giovane C, Egger M, et al. CINeMA: An approach for assessing confidence in the results of a network meta-analysis. PLoS Med. 2020;17(4):e1003082.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Papakonstantinou T, Nikolakopoulou A, Higgins JPT, Egger M, Salanti G. CINeMA: Software for semiautomated assessment of the confidence in the results of network meta-analysis. Campbell Syst Rev. 2020;16(1):e1080.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Bhutani S, Klempel MC, Kroeger CM, Trepanowski JF, Varady KA. Alternate day fasting and endurance exercise combine to reduce body weight and favorably alter plasma lipids in obese humans. Obesity (Silver Spring, Md). 2013;21(7):1370–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Brady AJ, Langton HM, Mulligan M, Egan B. Effects of 8 wk of 16:8 Time-restricted Eating in Male Middle- and Long-Distance Runners. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2021;53(3):633–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Cai H, Qin YL, Shi ZY, Chen JH, Zeng MJ, Zhou W, et al. Effects of alternate-day fasting on body weight and dyslipidaemia in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a randomised controlled trial. BMC Gastroenterol. 2019;19(1):219.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Catenacci VA, Pan Z, Ostendorf D, Brannon S, Gozansky WS, Mattson MP, et al. A randomized pilot study comparing zero-calorie alternate-day fasting to daily caloric restriction in adults with obesity. Obesity (Silver Spring, Md). 2016;24(9):1874–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Cho AR, Moon JY, Kim S, An KY, Oh M, Jeon JY, et al. Effects of alternate day fasting and exercise on cholesterol metabolism in overweight or obese adults: A pilot randomized controlled trial. Metabolism: Clin Exp. 2019;93:52–60.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Chow LS, Manoogian ENC, Alvear A, Fleischer JG, Thor H, Dietsche K, et al. Time-Restricted Eating Effects on Body Composition and Metabolic Measures in Humans who are Overweight: A Feasibility Study. Obesity. 2020;28(5):860–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Cienfuegos S, Gabel K, Kalam F, Ezpeleta M, Wiseman E, Pavlou V, et al. Effects of 4- and 6-h Time-Restricted Feeding on Weight and Cardiometabolic Health: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Adults with Obesity. Cell Metab. 2020;32(3):366-78.e3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Conley M, Le Fevre L, Haywood C, Proietto J. Is two days of intermittent energy restriction per week a feasible weight loss approach in obese males? A randomised pilot study. Nutr Dietet. 2018;75(1):65–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Coutinho SR, Halset EH, Gasbakk S, Rehfeld JF, Kulseng B, Truby H, et al. Compensatory mechanisms activated with intermittent energy restriction: A randomized control trial. Clin Nutr. 2018;37(3):815–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. de Oliveira Maranhão Pureza IR,da Silva Junior AE, Silva Praxedes DR, Lessa Vasconcelos LG, de Lima Macena M, Vieira de Melo IS, et al. Effects of time-restricted feeding on body weight, body composition and vital signs in low-income women with obesity: A 12-month randomized clinical trial. Clin Nutr. 2021;40(3):759–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Domaszewski P, Konieczny M, Pakosz P, Bączkowicz D, Sadowska-Krępa E. Effect of a six-week intermittent fasting intervention program on the composition of the human body in women over 60 years of age. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(11):4138.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Domaszewski P, Konieczny M, Pakosz P, Lukaniszyn-Domaszewska K, Mikulakova W, Sadowska-Krepa E, et al. Effect of a six-week times restricted eating intervention on the body composition in early elderly men with overweight. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):9816.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Fagundes GBP, Tibães JRB, Silva ML, Braga MM, Silveira ALM, Teixeira AL, et al. Metabolic and behavioral effects of time-restricted eating in women with overweight or obesity: Preliminary findings from a randomized study. Nutrition (Burbank, Los Angeles County, Calif). 2023;107:111909.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Gabel K, Kroeger CM, Trepanowski JF, Hoddy KK, Cienfuegos S, Kalam F, et al. Differential Effects of Alternate-Day Fasting Versus Daily Calorie Restriction on Insulin Resistance. Obesity (Silver Spring, Md). 2019;27(9):1443–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Harvie M, Wright C, Pegington M, McMullan D, Mitchell E, Martin B, et al. The effect of intermittent energy and carbohydrate restriction v. daily energy restriction on weight loss and metabolic disease risk markers in overweight women. British J Nutr. 2013;110(8):1534–47.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Harvie MN, Pegington M, Mattson MP, Frystyk J, Dillon B, Evans G, et al. The effects of intermittent or continuous energy restriction on weight loss and metabolic disease risk markers: a randomized trial in young overweight women. Int J Obesity. 2011;35(5):714–27.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Headland ML, Clifton PM, Keogh JB. Effect of intermittent compared to continuous energy restriction on weight loss and weight maintenance after 12 months in healthy overweight or obese adults. Int J Obesity. 2019;43(10):2028–36.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Hirsh SP, Pons M, Joyal SV, Swick AG. Avoiding holiday seasonal weight gain with nutrient-supported intermittent energy restriction: a pilot study. J Nutr Sci. 2019;8:e11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Hooshiar SH, Yazdani A, Jafarnejad S. Alternate-day modified fasting diet improves weight loss, subjective sleep quality and daytime dysfunction in women with obesity or overweight: a randomized, controlled trial. Front Nutr. 2023;10:1174293.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Hutchison AT, Liu B, Wood RE, Vincent AD, Thompson CH, O’Callaghan NJ, et al. Effects of Intermittent Versus Continuous Energy Intakes on Insulin Sensitivity and Metabolic Risk in Women with Overweight. Obesity. 2019;27(1):50–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Irani H, Abiri B, Khodami B, Yari Z, Ghazi ML, Hosseinzadeh N, et al. Effect of time restricted feeding on anthropometric measures, eating behavior, stress, serum levels of BDNF and LBP in overweight/obese women with food addiction: a randomized clinical trial. Nutr Neurosci. 2023;27(6):577–89.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Jamshed H, Steger FL, Bryan DR, Richman JS, Warriner AH, Hanick CJ, et al. Effectiveness of Early Time-Restricted Eating for Weight Loss, Fat Loss, and Cardiometabolic Health in Adults With Obesity: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2022;182(9):953–62.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Kotarsky CJ, Johnson NR, Mahoney SJ, Mitchell SL, Schimek RL, Stastny SN, et al. Time-restricted eating and concurrent exercise training reduces fat mass and increases lean mass in overweight and obese adults. Physiol Rep. 2021;9(10):e14868.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Liu D, Huang Y, Huang C, Yang S, Wei X, Zhang P, et al. Calorie Restriction with or without Time-Restricted Eating in Weight Loss. N Engl J Med. 2022;386(16):1495–504.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Liu HT, Chen SY, Ji HY, Dai ZQ. Effects of time-restricted feeding and walking exercise on the physical health of female college students with hidden obesity: a randomized trial. Front Pub Health. 2023;11:1020887.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Martens CR, Rossman MJ, Mazzo MR, Jankowski LR, Nagy EE, Denman BA, et al. Short-term time-restricted feeding is safe and feasible in non-obese healthy midlife and older adults. GeroScience. 2020;42(2):667–86.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Moro T, Tinsley G, Bianco A, Marcolin G, Pacelli QF, Battaglia G, et al. Effects of eight weeks of time-restricted feeding (16/8) on basal metabolism, maximal strength, body composition, inflammation, and cardiovascular risk factors in resistance-trained males. J Transl Med. 2016;14(1):290.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. Mraović T, Radaković S, Medić DR, Ostojić VT, Rađen S, Hajduković Z, et al. The effects of different caloric restriction diets on anthropometric and cardiometabolic risk factors in overweight and obese females. Vojnosanit Pregl. 2018;75(1):30–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Oh M, Kim S, An KY, Min J, Yang HI, Lee J, et al. Effects of alternate day calorie restriction and exercise on cardio-metabolic risk factors in overweight and obese adults: an exploratory randomized controlled study. BMC Public Health. 2018;18(1):1124.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Panizza CE, Lim U, Yonemori KM, Cassel KD, Wilkens LR, Harvie MN, et al. Effects of intermittent energy restriction combined with a Mediterranean diet on reducing visceral adiposity: a randomized active comparator pilot study. Nutrients. 2019;11(6):1386.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. Parvaresh A, Razavi R, Abbasi B, Yaghoobloo K, Hassanzadeh A, Mohammadifard N, et al. Modified alternate-day fasting vs. calorie restriction in the treatment of patients with metabolic syndrome: a randomized clinical trial. Complement Ther Med. 2019;47:102187.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Phillips NE, Mareschal J, Schwab N, Manoogian ENC, Borloz S, Ostinelli G, et al. The effects of time-restricted eating versus standard dietary advice on weight, metabolic health and the consumption of processed food: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial in community-based adults. Nutrients. 2021;13(3):1042.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  64. Pinto AM, Bordoli C, Buckner LP, Kim C, Kaplan PC, Del Arenal IM, et al. Intermittent energy restriction is comparable to continuous energy restriction for cardiometabolic health in adults with central obesity: A randomized controlled trial; the Met-IER study. Clin Nutr. 2020;39(6):1753–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Queiroz JDN, Macedo RCO, Dos Santos GC, Munhoz SV, Machado CLF, de Menezes RL, et al. Cardiometabolic effects of early v. delayed time-restricted eating plus energetic restriction in adults with overweight and obesity: an exploratory randomised clinical trial. Br J Nutr. 2022:1–13.

  66. Schuebel R, Nattenmueller J, Sookthai D, Nonnenmacher T, Graf ME, Riedl L, et al. Effects of intermittent and continuous calorie restriction on body weight and metabolism over 50 wk: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Clin Nutr. 2018;108(5):933–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Steger FL, Donnelly JE, Hull HR, Li X, Hu J, Sullivan DK. Intermittent and continuous energy restriction result in similar weight loss, weight loss maintenance, and body composition changes in a 6 month randomized pilot study. Clin Obes. 2021;11(2):e12430.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Stekovic S, Hofer SJ, Tripolt N, Aon MA, Royer P, Pein L, et al. Alternate Day Fasting Improves Physiological and Molecular Markers of Aging in Healthy. Non-obese Human Cell Metabol. 2019;30(3):462-76.e6.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Stote KS, Baer DJ, Spears K, Paul DR, Harris GK, Rumpler WV, et al. A controlled trial of reduced meal frequency without caloric restriction in healthy, normal-weight, middle-aged adults. Am J Clin Nutr. 2007;85(4):981–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Sundfor TM, Svendsen M, Tonstad S. Effect of intermittent versus continuous energy restriction on weight loss, maintenance and cardiometabolic risk: A randomized 1-year trial. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2018;28(7):698–706.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Thomas EA, Zaman A, Sloggett KJ, Steinke S, Grau L, Catenacci VA, et al. Early time-restricted eating compared with daily caloric restriction: A randomized trial in adults with obesity. Obesity (Silver Spring, Md). 2022;30(5):1027–38.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Tinsley GM, Forsse JS, Butler NK, Paoli A, Bane AA, La Bounty PM, et al. Time-restricted feeding in young men performing resistance training: A randomized controlled trial. Eur J Sport Sci. 2017;17(2):200–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Tinsley GM, Moore ML, Graybeal AJ, Paoli A, Kim Y, Gonzales JU, et al. Time-restricted feeding plus resistance training in active females: a randomized trial. Am J Clin Nutr. 2019;110(3):628–40.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  74. Trepanowski JF, Kroeger CM, Barnosky A, Klempel MC, Bhutani S, Hoddy KK, et al. Effect of Alternate-Day Fasting on Weight Loss, Weight Maintenance, and Cardioprotection Among Metabolically Healthy Obese Adults: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177(7):930–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  75. Varady KA, Bhutani S, Klempel MC, Kroeger CM, Trepanowski JF, Haus JM, et al. Alternate day fasting for weight loss in normal weight and overweight subjects: a randomized controlled trial. Nutr J. 2013;12(1):146.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  76. Xie Z, Sun Y, Ye Y, Hu D, Zhang H, He Z, et al. Randomized controlled trial for time-restricted eating in healthy volunteers without obesity. Nat Commun. 2022;13(1):1003.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  77. Zhang LM, Liu Z, Wang JQ, Li RQ, Ren JY, Gao X, et al. Randomized controlled trial for time-restricted eating in overweight and obese young adults. iScience. 2022;25(9):104870.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  78. Schwingshackl L, Zahringer J, Nitschke K, Torbahn G, Lohner S, Kuhn T, et al. Impact of intermittent energy restriction on anthropometric outcomes and intermediate disease markers in patients with overweight and obesity: systematic review and meta-analyses. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2021;61(8):1293–304.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Cioffi I, Evangelista A, Ponzo V, Ciccone G, Soldati L, Santarpia L, et al. Intermittent versus continuous energy restriction on weight loss and cardiometabolic outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Transl Med. 2018;16(1) (no pagination)(371).

  80. Patikorn C, Roubal K, Veettil SK, Chandran V, Pham T, Lee YY, et al. Intermittent Fasting and Obesity-Related Health Outcomes An Umbrella Review of Meta-analyses of Randomized Clinical Trials. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4(12).

  81. Park J, Seo Y-G, Paek Y-J, Song HJ, Park KH, Noh H-M. Effect of alternate-day fasting on obesity and cardiometabolic risk: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Metabol Clin Exp. 2020;111.

  82. Elortegui Pascual P, Rolands MR, Eldridge AL, Kassis A, Mainardi F, Lê KA, et al. A meta-analysis comparing the effectiveness of alternate day fasting, the 5:2 diet, and time-restricted eating for weight loss. Obesity (Silver Spring, Md). 2023;31 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):9–21.

  83. Allaf M, Elghazaly H, Mohamed OG, Fareen MFK, Zaman S, Salmasi AM, et al. Intermittent fasting for the prevention of cardiovascular disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021;1(1):Cd013496.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Janssen H, Kahles F, Liu D, Downey J, Koekkoek LL, Roudko V, et al. Monocytes re-enter the bone marrow during fasting and alter the host response to infection. Immunity. 2023.

  85. Ezpeleta M, Gabel K, Cienfuegos S, Kalam F, Lin S, Pavlou V, et al. Effect of alternate day fasting combined with aerobic exercise on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: A randomized controlled trial. Cell Metab. 2023;35(1):56-70.e3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Delli Paoli G, van de Laarschot D, Friesema ECH, Verkaik R, Giacco A, Senese R, et al. Short-Term, Combined Fasting and Exercise Improves Body Composition in Healthy Males. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. 2020;30(6):386–95.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Chen J-H, Lu LW, Ge Q, Feng D, Yu J, Liu B, et al. Missing puzzle pieces of time-restricted-eating (TRE) as a long-term weight-loss strategy in overweight and obese people? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2021.

  88. Li X, Nian B, Li R, Cao X, Liu Y, Liu Y, et al. Fasting and metabolic syndrome: A systematic review and Meta-analyses. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2022:1–9.

  89. Fatahi S, Nazary-Vannani A, Sohouli MH, Mokhtari Z, Kord-Varkaneh H, Moodi V, et al. The effect of fasting and energy restricting diets on markers of glucose and insulin controls: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2021;61(20):3383–94.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Moon S, Kang J, Kim SH, Chung HS, Kim YJ, Yu JM, et al. Beneficial Effects of Time-Restricted Eating on Metabolic Diseases: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis. Nutrients. 2020;12(5).

  91. Pellegrini M, Cioffi I, Evangelista A, Ponzo V, Goitre I, Ciccone G, et al. Effects of time-restricted feeding on body weight and metabolism. A systematic review and meta-analysis (vol 16, pg 129, 2020). Rev Endocrine Metabol Disord. 2020;21(1):35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. de Oliveira Maranha IR, de Lima Macena M, da Silva Junior EA, Rodrigues Silva Praxedes D, Vasconcelos LGL, Bueno NB. Effect of early time-restricted feeding on the metabolic profile of adults with excess weight: A systematic review with meta-analysis. Clinical Nutrition. 2021;40(4):1788–99.

  93. American Heart Association Epidemiology and Prevention|Lifestyle and Cardiometabolic Health Scientific Sessions 2024 AP. 8-hour time-restricted eating linked to a 91% higher risk of cardiovascular death. Available from: https://newsroom.heart.org/news/8-hour-time-restricted-eating-linked-to-a-91-higher-risk-of-cardiovascular-death.

  94. Brogi S, Tabanelli R, Puca S, Calderone V. Intermittent Fasting: Myths, Fakes and Truth on This Dietary Regimen Approach. Foods. 2024;13(13).

  95. Busetto L, Bettini S, Makaronidis J, Roberts CA, Halford JCG, Batterham RL. Mechanisms of weight regain. Eur J Intern Med. 2021;93:3–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Rinott E, Youngster I, Yaskolka Meir A, Tsaban G, Zelicha H, Kaplan A, et al. Effects of Diet-Modulated Autologous Fecal Microbiota Transplantation on Weight Regain. Gastroenterology. 2021;160(1):158-73.e10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Li M, Wang S, Li Y, Zhao M, Kuang J, Liang D, et al. Gut microbiota-bile acid crosstalk contributes to the rebound weight gain after calorie restriction in mice. Nat Commun. 2022;13(1):2060.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  98. van Baak MA, Mariman ECM. Mechanisms of weight regain after weight loss - the role of adipose tissue. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2019;15(5):274–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Cottam MA, Caslin HL, Winn NC, Hasty AH. Multiomics reveals persistence of obesity-associated immune cell phenotypes in adipose tissue during weight loss and weight regain in mice. Nat Commun. 2022;13(1):2950.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  100. Wąsowicz G, Poraj-Weder M, Matthys C. Dreaming of effective diet change? Motivation, emotions, and dietician presence can all matter. J Health Psychol. 2022;27(11):2505–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Waliłko E, Napierała M, Bryśkiewicz M, Fronczyk A, Majkowska L. High-Protein or Low Glycemic Index Diet-Which Energy-Restricted Diet Is Better to Start a Weight Loss Program? Nutrients. 2021;13(4).

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Funding

The study was supported by the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2023M732442 to Jinming Huang), the Postdoctor Research Fund of West China Hospital, Sichuan University (2024HXBH064 to Jinming Huang), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81902287 to Yi Li), the Department of Science and Technology of Sichuan Province (2022NSFSC1506 to Yi Li, 24NSFSC3185 to Jinming Huang), the Industry-University-Research innovation fund of the Science and Technology Development Center, Ministry of Education of China (2021JH011 to Zhen Cai); and the Youth Talent Fund of Sichuan Provincial People’s Hospital (2022QN58 to Zhiyuan Jiang). The funder had no role in the conceptualization, design, data collection, analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Jinming Huang and Yi Li share first authorship.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Key Laboratory of Rehabilitation Medicine, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China

    Jinming Huang & Yi Li

  2. Department of Plastic Surgery, Sichuan Provincial People’s Hospital, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

    Maohua Chen, Zhen Cai & Zhiyuan Jiang

  3. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

    Zhaolun Cai

Authors
  1. Jinming Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yi Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maohua Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Zhaolun Cai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Zhen Cai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Zhiyuan Jiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

The original idea of this research was conceived by Jiang Z., Huang J., and Li Y. drafted this manuscript. Jiang Z., Zhaolun C., Maohua C. and Zhen C. participated in the development of the eligibility criteria, search strategy, data extraction methods and data summary plan. Huang J., Jiang Z., Yi L. and Maohua C. searched and screened the studies, and extracted and analyzed the data. Cai Z. and Jiang Z assessed the methodological quality of the included studies. Zhaolun C. supervised this work. All authors approved the final version of this manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Zhen Cai or Zhiyuan Jiang.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

None of the authors has any potential conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Huang, J., Li, Y., Chen, M. et al. Comparing caloric restriction regimens for effective weight management in adults: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 21, 108 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-024-01657-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-024-01657-9

Keywords

International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity

ISSN: 1479-5868

Contact us