Time-restricted eating (TRE) is often praised for its simplicity and potential health benefits—but is it as sustainable as it seems? A new systematic review and meta-analysis reveals that TRE may increase hunger in adults with overweight and obesity, even when calorie intake is matched to a conventional eating pattern. Before you recommend skipping breakfast or narrowing the eating window, check out what this new study suggests regarding how TRE might affect appetite regulation and long-term adherence.
Overview
- What did they test? Researchers conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to evaluate how time-restricted eating (TRE) affects hunger and other subjective perceptions in adults with overweight or obesity. They only included studies where caloric intake was matched between TRE and control diets to isolate the effect of meal timing.
- What did they find? Across four studies with 323 participants, TRE significantly increased feelings of hunger compared to isocaloric control diets. Other subjective perceptions such as fullness and satisfaction showed mixed or neutral results. No significant differences were found in body weight, body fat, or metabolic health markers between TRE and control diets.
- What does it mean for you? If you're considering or coaching TRE for weight management, be aware that it may increase hunger even when calories are controlled as this could potentially impact adherence. While TRE doesn’t appear to offer unique significant benefits over traditional calorie-controlled diets, it may still be useful for those who find it convenient or satisfying. Its long-term sustainability remains uncertain, especially in populations already struggling with appetite regulation.
What’s the Problem?
Obesity continues to be a critical global health issue, with over 1 billion individuals affected worldwide. Among various dietary strategies to address this epidemic, time-restricted eating (TRE)—a form of intermittent fasting that limits food intake to a defined daily window—has gained popularity. Unlike traditional calorie restriction, TRE aligns eating patterns with circadian rhythms, or a defined window of time, and may confer metabolic benefits independent of calorie reduction. However, the literature remains inconclusive regarding its efficacy, particularly whether its effects are attributable to physiological changes or simply reduced energy intake due to the shortened eating window. Compounding this uncertainty, few randomized trials have controlled for energy intake between groups, making it unclear how TRE affects subjective factors like hunger, satiety, and mood during weight loss efforts in individuals with overweight or obesity as compared to unrestricted timing. This new systematic review and meta-analysis addresses a key gap by comparing TRE to other isocaloric dietary strategies to isolate its impact on hunger and other perceptual outcomes.
Purpose
The purpose of this study was to systematically review and meta-analyze randomized controlled trials comparing time-restricted eating (TRE) to other isocaloric dietary strategies in adults with overweight or obesity. The primary focus was on hunger and other subjective perceptions related to food intake. Secondary outcomes of interest included body composition and metabolic parameters. The authors aimed to determine whether the effects of TRE on appetite were due to meal timing itself or merely the result of caloric restriction.
Hypothesis
The authors hypothesized that TRE increases hunger due to the prolonged fasting period compared to the isocaloric control group.
