Harvie · International journal of obesity (2005) 2011 · randomized controlled trial · n=107

The effects of intermittent or continuous energy restriction on weight loss and metabolic disease risk markers: a randomized trial in young overweight women.

Cited 826 times in the scientific literature.

Level 2 - randomized trial

Individual randomized controlled trial in humans

PubMed 20921964 · doi:10.1038/ijo.2010.171 · record verified 2026-08-30

What was done

Researchers randomized 107 overweight or obese premenopausal women (mean BMI 30.6 kg/m2) to either intermittent energy restriction (IER: approximately 2710 kJ/day for 2 days per week) or continuous energy restriction (CER: approximately 6276 kJ/day for 7 days per week), both aiming for an overall 25% energy restriction. Participants were followed for 6 months. Outcomes included body weight, anthropometry, insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), lipid profiles, inflammatory markers, and other disease-related biomarkers assessed at baseline, 1, 3, and 6 months.

What was found

Using last observation carried forward analysis, weight loss was not significantly different between groups: mean weight change was -6.4 kg (95% CI: -7.9 to -4.8) for IER versus -5.6 kg (95% CI: -6.9 to -4.4) for CER (P = 0.4). Reductions in leptin, free androgen index, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, triglycerides, and blood pressure were comparable between groups. Reductions in fasting insulin and insulin resistance were modest in both groups but greater with IER than CER: difference between groups was -1.2 uU/ml (95% CI: -1.4 to -1.0; P = 0.04) for fasting insulin and -1.2 uU*mmol/l (95% CI: -1.5 to -1.0; P = 0.04) for insulin resistance.

Why it matters

This study provides randomized trial evidence that intermittent energy restriction (the 5:2 diet pattern) is a viable alternative to continuous daily calorie restriction for weight reduction and metabolic risk factor improvement.

Limits

The study was restricted to premenopausal overweight and obese women, limiting generalizability to men, postmenopausal women, or normal-weight individuals. The primary analysis relied on last observation carried forward, which can bias effect estimates. Follow-up was limited to 6 months, leaving long-term adherence, weight maintenance, and clinical cardiovascular or metabolic endpoints unmeasured.

Cited by