Jump to Section
Results Summary and Professional Abstract Final Research Report Peer-Review Summary Conflict of Interest Disclosures Project Information Key Dates Study Registration Information
Research
Completed; PCORI Public and Professional Abstracts, and Final Research Report Posted
Has Results

Comparing Two Programs to Help Latino Men Lose Weight -- The HOMBRE Trial

Sign Up for Updates

Results Summary

What was the research about?

Obesity is more common among Latino men than other men in the United States. Programs that help people learn how to change behaviors, like eating healthy and being physically active, may help with weight loss. But these programs are often based on research with non-Latino White women.

In this study, the research team compared two programs to help Latino men lose weight:

  • The HOMBRE program. This program was culturally adapted for Latino men. The program provided men with a scale, an activity tracker, and an app to track food intake. Then, over 12 weekly sessions, men received information about fitness, healthy eating, and obesity. Men chose between in-person, online, or self-led support. For in-person and online support, a bilingual health coach led meetings and gave feedback to each man, then had monthly calls for eight months. In the self-led option, patients received reminders to watch the videos, use the devices, and contact the coach weekly for 12 weeks and then monthly for eight months.
  • An online self-led program. In this program, men viewed an online self-led video course for 12 weeks. They received health coach support on request for up to one year.

What were the results?

After 18 months, the two programs didn’t differ in the percentage of men who had lost 5 percent of their starting weight. In each program, men lost about 2 kilograms (4.4 pounds). The two programs also didn’t differ in:

  • Blood pressure
  • Waist size
  • Types of foods eaten and physical activity
  • Weight-related health problems
  • Quality of life, depression symptoms, or how well they slept

At six months, men in HOMBRE had lost an average of 1.3 kilograms (2.9 pounds) more than men in the online self-led program. At 12 months, they had lost 1.1 kilograms (2.4 pounds) more. Also, among men in HOMBRE, some results showed that men who chose group meetings lost more weight than men who chose the self-led option. But the research team don’t know for sure that this was true.

Who was in the study?

The study included 424 Latino men with overweight or obesity and one or more risk factors for heart disease, like diabetes or high cholesterol. Among patients, 53 percent had a college degree or higher, and 60 percent had annual household incomes over $100,000. The average age was 47. All received care from one of 14 primary care clinics in California.

What did the research team do?

The research team assigned men by chance to one of the two programs. The team measured weight, waist size, and blood pressure when the study started and 18 months later. Patients completed surveys by phone at 6 and 12 months and in person at 18 months.

Patients, primary care providers, and medical directors helped design the study.

What were the limits of the study?

People in the study had high education and income levels. Results may differ for Latino men from other backgrounds.

Future research could look at other ways to help Latino men maintain weight loss.

How can people use the results?

Primary care clinics can use the results when considering weight loss programs for Latino men.

Final Research Report

View this project's final research report.

Peer-Review Summary

Peer review of PCORI-funded research helps make sure the report presents complete, balanced, and useful information about the research. It also assesses how the project addressed PCORI’s Methodology Standards. During peer review, experts read a draft report of the research and provide comments about the report. These experts may include a scientist focused on the research topic, a specialist in research methods, a patient or caregiver, and a healthcare professional. These reviewers cannot have conflicts of interest with the study.

The peer reviewers point out where the draft report may need revision. For example, they may suggest ways to improve descriptions of the conduct of the study or to clarify the connection between results and conclusions. Sometimes, awardees revise their draft reports twice or more to address all of the reviewers’ comments. 

Peer reviewers commented and the researchers made changes or provided responses. Those comments and responses included the following:

  • The reviewers found the report to be a thorough description of a well-conducted study.
  • The reviewers noted that the patient advisory board was made up of people who were able to invest a lot of hours to the project, and therefore was likely limited to people with more resources and that could afford to devote that much time to the study. They asked whether the patient advisory board accurately reflected the study participants. The researchers explained that they recruited advisory board members the same way they recruited study participants but acknowledged that individuals with multiple jobs and difficult work schedules might have found the time investment to be unmanageable. The researchers also stated that they tried to accommodate broad advisory board participation by having the meetings in the evening and offering different options for engaging in the intervention.
  • The reviewers asked the researchers to consider whether the study results were dampened by common behavioral research problems like people entering research studies being more motivated to change their behavior, or at least trying to appear more engaged. The researchers acknowledged that these factors could be an issue that would affect the generalizability of their results.
  • The reviewers asked about the engagement of primary care providers in the study, and whether the primary care providers treating study participants were aware of the study. The researchers described how they involved primary care providers at the beginning to introduce the study and also to give providers a chance to remove people from the contact lists if the clinicians felt a patient would not be appropriate for the study. The researchers acknowledged that they did not involve the primary care provider otherwise in the study, and that strengthening the collaboration with the provider would be worth testing in the future.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures

View the COI Disclosure Form

Project Information

Lisa G. Rosas, MPH, PhD
Stanford University School of Medicine^
$2,059,877
10.25302/06.2022.AD.151133394IC
The HOMBRE Trial: Comparing Two Innovative Approaches to Reduce Chronic Disease Risk among Latino Men

Key Dates

July 2016
March 2022
2016
2022

Study Registration Information

HSRP20164011
NCT03092960

^Palo Alto Medical Foundation Research Institute was the original organization associated with this project.

Tags

Has Results
Project Status
Award Type
Health Conditions Health Conditions These are the broad terms we use to categorize our funded research studies; specific diseases or conditions are included within the appropriate larger category. Note: not all of our funded projects focus on a single disease or condition; some touch on multiple diseases or conditions, research methods, or broader health system interventions. Such projects won’t be listed by a primary disease/condition and so won’t appear if you use this filter tool to find them. View Glossary
Populations Populations PCORI is interested in research that seeks to better understand how different clinical and health system options work for different people. These populations are frequently studied in our portfolio or identified as being of interest by our stakeholders. View Glossary
Funding Opportunity Type
Intervention Strategy Intervention Strategies PCORI funds comparative clinical effectiveness research (CER) studies that compare two or more options or approaches to health care, or that compare different ways of delivering or receiving care. View Glossary
Research Priority Area
State State The state where the project originates, or where the primary institution or organization is located. View Glossary
Last updated: January 27, 2023