Research reviews
How fasting strategies compare with continuous restriction
Intermittent fasting strategies and their effects on body weight and other cardiometabolic risk factors: systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials
Published
Evidence search through
View source reference
This reference credits the original source. The plain-language summary on this page is by Fasting Free.
Saved only in this browser, after you choose Save.
Fasting Free source summary: https://fastingfree.com/education/semnani-azad-2025-review/
PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY
What it found
Benefits were broadly similar to continuous restriction. Alternate-day fasting showed a small additional weight difference, concentrated in shorter trials.
Keep these limits in view
Protocols and populations varied. Network comparisons include indirect evidence; the review does not establish long-term disease prevention or a best schedule for an individual.
Understand the context
- Evidence type
- Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials
- Population or scope
- Adults with varied health conditions
- Sample or coverage
- 99 randomized trials; 6,582 participants
- Study duration or data period
- Varied; most trials were shorter than 24 weeks
- Comparison
- Alternate-day, whole-day, and time-restricted patterns versus continuous energy restriction or unrestricted eating.
Research terms in this source
Open a definition for help reading the study.