Financial incentives to improve health have received increasing attention, but are subject to ethical concerns. Monetary Contingency Contracts (MCCs), which require individuals to deposit money that is refunded contingent on reaching a goal, are a potential alternative strategy. This review evaluates systematically the evidence for weight loss-related MCCs. Randomised controlled trials testing the effect of weight loss-related MCCs were identified in online databases. Random-effects meta-analyses were used to calculate overall effect sizes for weight loss and participant retention. The association between MCC characteristics and weight loss/participant retention effects was calculated using meta-regression. There was a significant small-to-medium effect of MCCs on weight loss during treatment when one outlier study was removed. Group refunds, deposit not paid as lump sum, participants setting their own deposit size and additional behaviour change techniques were associated with greater weight loss during treatment. Post-treatment, there was no significant effect of MCCs on weight loss. There was a significant small-to-medium effect of MCCs on participant retention during treatment. Researcher-set deposits paid as one lump sum, refunds delivered on an all-or-nothing basis and refunds contingent on attendance at classes were associated with greater retention during treatment. Post-treatment, there was no significant effect of MCCs on participant retention. The results support the use of MCCs to promote weight loss and participant retention up to the point that the incentive is removed and identifies the conditions under which MCCs work best.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 51 citations exist upstream.