## 3 Results
### Statistical Analysis Results--Main Hypothesis  
In the intervention group, the average body weight was 115.6 \(\pm\) 30.29 (min. 66.5, max. 224.7) kg, the average BMI was 38.9 \(\pm\) 8.78, while the average 90-day body weight was 109.3 \(\pm\) 27.24 (min. 67.4, max. 217.2) kg. After removing an extreme outlier, (the person with the maximal weight), the samples passed the Shapiro-Wilk test for normality, and a paired samples \(t\)-test found that there was a significant weight decrease (weight loss) of 6.3 \(\pm\) 6.01 kg; i.e., 5.06% of the startup weight (95% CI 4.60-7.94), \(p\) < 0.001. This result was confirmed by a Wilcoxon signed-rank test performed on the whole cohort, including the outlier (\(p\) < 0.001). The Mann-Kendall test returned a significant trend for 31 out of 35 patients in the SWL sub-group, and 14 out of 19 patients in the UWL sub-group. The average slope of the linear trend line was \(-\)95 \(\pm\) 69.7 g/day in the SWL and \(-\)23 \(\pm\) 22.4 g/day in the UWL sub-group, respectively. Therefore, the Pearson correlation analysis between the WL-slope and the relevant set weight ratios was carried out for \(n\) = 45 patients. We found three significant correlations, as shown in Table 4.  
The negative correlation coefficients mean that a higher value of consumption of these sets is associated with a steeper negative slope value i.e., more weight loss. As for the changes in patient preferences, we computed the significant trends of weight ratios of the most important sets (i.e., those with a weight ration over 3%) over the first 90 days, separately in the SWL vs. UWL sub-groups, with a slope \(>\) 1%/90 days. The results are shown in Table 5.  
Please note that the set 'Raw or cooked/steamed vegetables' is the union of the sets 'Raw vegetables' and 'Cooked/steamed vegetables' and the set 'Raw fruits and vegetables' \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Set Name (Avg. Weight Ratio)**} & **Correlation** & \multirow{2}{*}{\(p\)} \\  & **Coefficient** & \\ \hline Raw fruits and vegetables (21.7\%) & \(-\)0.33 & 0.03 \\ Poultry dishes (7.7\%) & \(-\)0.3 & 0.04 \\ Potato dishes (3.1\%) & \(-\)0.33 & 0.03 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Significant correlations between the weight loss slope and the most relevant dietary set weight ratios, for the patients in the intervention group with a significant temporal trend (\(n\) = 45). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Variable**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Successful WL**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Unsuccessful WL**} \\  & **Period 1** & **Period 2** & **Period 1** & **Period 2** \\ \hline Daily energy intake [kcal], average & 1502.0 & 1439.8 & 1496.8 & 1577.0 \\ Energy ratio, dietary fibers [\%], average & 3.7 & 3.6 & 3.1 & 3.1 \\ Weight ratio, raw fruits and vegetables [\%], average & 22.8 & 23.7 & 19 & 19.7 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Dietary composition data for the successful and unsuccessful weight loser sub-groups in the first and second period of the observation (\(n\) = 54). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Set Name (Avg. Weight Ratio)**} & **Correlation** & \multirow{2}{*}{\(p\)} \\  & **Coefficient** & \\ \hline Raw fruits and vegetables (21.7\%) & \(-\)0.33 & 0.03 \\ Poultry dishes (7.7\%) & \(-\)0.3 & 0.04 \\ Potato dishes (3.1\%) & \(-\)0.33 & 0.03 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Significant temporal trends of weight ratios of the most important dietary sets, in the successful weight loser (SWL) and the unsuccessful weight loser (UWL) sub-groups. is the union of the sets 'Raw vegetables' and 'Raw fruits', so these two sets are overlapping. A negative trend slope in Table 5 marks a decreasing trend. As an example, the weight ratio of the most important raw vegetable/fruit set is illustrated in Figure 3, averaged for the SWL (with a significant trend) and UWL (with no significant trend) sub-groups, in the function of the time.