Objective The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of skipping breakfast on body composition and cardiometabolic risk factors. Methods This study conducted a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating breakfast skipping compared with breakfast consumption. Inclusion criteria included age ≥ 18, intervention duration ≥ 4 weeks, ≥ 7 participants per group, and ≥ 1 body composition measure. Random‐effects meta‐analyses of the effect of breakfast skipping on body composition and cardiometabolic risk factors were performed. Results Seven RCTs (n = 425 participants) with an average duration of 8.6 weeks were included. Compared with breakfast consumption, breakfast skipping significantly reduced body weight (weighted mean difference [WMD] = −0.54 kg [95% CI: −1.05 to −0.03], P = 0.04, I2 = 21.4%). Percent body fat was reported in 5 studies and was not significantly different between breakfast skippers and consumers. Three studies reported on low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL), which was increased in breakfast skippers as compared with breakfast consumers (WMD = 9.24 mg/dL [95% CI: 2.18 to 16.30], P = 0.01). Breakfast skipping did not lead to significant differences in blood pressure, total cholesterol, high‐density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, triglycerides, C‐reactive protein, insulin, fasting glucose, leptin, homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance, or ghrelin. Conclusions Breakfast skipping may have a modest impact on weight loss and may increase LDL in the short term. Further studies are needed to provide additional insight into the effects of breakfast skipping.

Although mobile health (mHealth) devices offer a unique opportunity to capture patient health data remotely, it is unclear whether patients will consistently use multiple devices simultaneously and/or if chronic disease affects adherence. Three healthy and three chronically ill participants were recruited to provide data on 11 health indicators via four devices and a diet app. The healthy participants averaged overall weekly use of 76%, compared to 16% for those with chronic illnesses. Device adherence declined across all participants during the study. Patients with chronic illnesses, with arguably the most to benefit from advanced (or increased) monitoring, may be less likely to adopt and use these devices compared to healthy individuals. Results suggest device fatigue may be a significant problem. Use of mobile technologies may have the potential to transform care delivery across populations and within individuals over time. However, devices may need to be tailored to meet the specific patient needs.

The power of lifestyle as medicine was perceived thousands of years ago. There is now consistent and compelling science to support the important influence of lifestyle on health. Approximately 80% of chronic disease and premature death could be prevented by not smoking, being physically active, and adhering to a healthful dietary pattern. Cardiovascular disease, diabetes, stroke, dementia, and cancer are all influenced by lifestyle choices. Despite the ample evidence about what behaviors promote health, confusion still prevails among the general population. This is particularly true with regard to diet. Confusing nutrition messages from scientists, the media, the food industry, and other sources have made it all but impossible for any single authority to convey persuasively the fundamentals of healthful eating. The case is made here that a global coalition of diverse experts has the power to do what no individual can: clarify and popularize an understanding of the fundamentals of a health-promoting, sustainable pattern of diet and lifestyle, and rally the general public to their consistent support.

Childhood obesity is a complex problem that warrants early intervention. General recommendations for obesity prevention and nutrition counseling exist. However, these are notably imprecise with regard to early and targeted interventions to prevent and treat obesity in pediatric populations. This study examines family medicine primary care providers' (PCPs) perceived barriers for preventing and treating pediatric obesity and their related practice behavior during well-child visits. Methods. A written survey addressing perceived barriers and current practices addressing obesity at well-child visits were administered to PCPs at eleven family medicine clinics in the Duke University Health System. Results. The most common perceived barriers identified by PCPs to prevention or treatment of obesity in children were families not getting enough exercise (93%) and families too often having fast food meals (86%). Most PCPs do not discuss fast foods at or prior to the twelve-month well-child visit. The two-year visit is the first well-child visit at which a majority of PCPs (68%) discuss fast food. Conclusion. No clear consensus exists as to when PCPs should discuss fast food in early well-child checks. Previous research has shown a profound shift in children's dietary habits toward fast foods, such as French fries, that occurs between the one- and two-year well-child checks. Consideration should be given to having a “French Fry Discussion” at every twelve-month well-child care visit.

No abstract