Omada’s GLP-1 Study Links Added Support to Greater Weight Loss

•

Energy & Metabolism

Share this post

On October 20, 2026, Omada Health announced findings from a 12-week comparison linking its GLP-1 Care Track with greater weight loss and changes in body composition than usual care. The company said the study was published in Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism and would be presented at the World Obesity and Weight Management Congress in Boston.

Inside the comparison

The study included 245 adults with obesity who had started a GLP-1 medication for weight loss within the prior eight weeks. Of those participants, 151 used Omada’s program and 94 received usual care. Researchers compared changes over 12 weeks.

The research examined support delivered alongside medication. Omada describes its Care Track as help between medical visits, with several services brought together in one program:

A dedicated health coach.
GLP-1-specific peer groups.
Digital meal logging and behavior tracking.
AI-powered nutrition support.
Access to an exercise specialist who provides a personalized plan developed by a physical therapist.

That description matters when reading the results. The program was broader than an exercise plan or a series of coaching conversations. It combined nutrition-related tools with social support and physical-activity planning.

Body composition was measured at home using bioelectrical impedance scales, according to the company’s announcement. The study also tracked reported well-being and physical functioning. This gave the comparison a wider focus than weight change alone.

The study was titled “Quality Plus Quantity: Evaluation of a Virtual GLP-1 Programme With Physical Activity Support to Promote Healthy Body Composition Change During GLP-1 Weight Loss.” Omada said it was conducted through its Omada Insights Lab ANSWERS Initiative, which examines real-world data from the company’s weight-health programs.

The reported outcomes

According to Omada’s announcement, the program group showed larger average changes across several measures at 12 weeks:

Body weight: Participants in Omada’s group lost an average of 6.0% of starting body weight. The usual-care group lost 3.3%.
Body-fat percentage: Omada reported a change of −3.3% in its group, compared with −1.6% in usual care. These figures are presented in the form reported by the company.
Muscle-mass percentage: The reported change was +0.6% in Omada’s group and +0.2% in usual care.
Reported function and well-being: Omada participants reported greater improvements in physical functioning and well-being. They also reported greater confidence in their ability to lose weight.
Reported mental health symptoms: The company said depression and anxiety symptoms declined more in its group than in usual care.

These outcomes cover different parts of the weight-loss experience. Body weight describes the overall change on the scale. Body-fat and muscle-mass percentages describe the reported composition of that weight, while physical functioning concerns how participants felt they could function.

For men concerned about capability after 45, the inclusion of physical functioning makes the study relevant beyond its weight-loss headline. A discussion about progress can include activity and daily function rather than ending with the scale reading. That is the practical question raised by the study’s choice of outcomes.

Omada Chief Medical Officer Thomas Tsang said GLP-1 care should consider “the quality of the weight loss.” The company’s release describes lean-mass preservation as relevant to metabolic rate and physical function. It also presents exercise and resistance training as possible strategies for supporting fat loss while protecting lean mass.

That is the company’s interpretation and context for the findings. The reported results still need to be judged by the study’s design and the measures it used.

Where caution belongs

Several features limit what can be concluded from this comparison. They matter most when moving from a group average to a claim about a program or an individual’s care.

The study was not randomized. NewBeauty reported that participants were not randomly assigned to the groups. Selection differences or other factors could help explain the results, so the comparison does not establish that Omada’s program caused the larger changes.
The company studied its own service. NewBeauty also reported that Omada conducted the study. That creates a commercial interest in the outcome. The executive’s comments should be read as the program provider’s interpretation rather than an independent assessment.
Usual care was varied. The comparison group could include medication alone or medication alongside other lifestyle support. In that group, 26% reported using another lifestyle or wellness program during the study. This was not a uniform comparison of medication alone against medication plus Omada.
The support came as a bundle. The study did not isolate coaching from exercise planning or nutrition support. It therefore cannot identify which service contributed to the observed differences. Describing it as proof of an exercise component would go beyond the comparison.
Muscle percentage is not absolute muscle mass. A percentage describes a share of a changing total. A higher muscle-mass percentage does not establish that the same absolute amount of muscle was retained or that muscle was gained. It should not be treated as a strength-test result either.
Measurement and reporting details were limited. The announcement did not report validation of the home body-composition readings against another method. It also did not provide confidence intervals, detailed baseline characteristics or attrition. Statistical methods were not set out in the retrieved release, leaving the precision of the differences difficult to assess.
Symptom changes lacked clinical detail. The announcement did not provide the underlying depression and anxiety scales or absolute symptom changes. Those outcomes are best described as reported improvements rather than a quantified clinical benefit.
The findings have a narrow time frame and population. The follow-up does not establish durable weight loss or long-term muscle preservation. The source material also provides no male-specific or age-stratified results. It cannot establish that men over 45 would experience the same outcomes.

These distinctions are central to interpreting muscle questions around weight-loss medication. The useful reading is an association between a support program and several short-term outcomes, not a guarantee of preserved strength or a verdict on any individual service.

Keep function visible

The practical value of this research is a broader conversation about progress. For someone receiving weight-loss care, the study offers a reason to discuss body composition and physical functioning alongside changes in body weight.

Questions for a qualified clinician can stay close to what the research actually examined:

Which measures of physical function belong alongside weight when reviewing progress?
How should body-composition readings be interpreted in the context of overall health?
How do exercise planning and nutrition support fit the person’s health status and treatment?

Those questions do not require adopting Omada’s program or copying its services. They keep attention on outcomes that matter to a person’s daily life. The answers belong within individual care, not in a universal exercise or nutrition prescription drawn from this comparison.

The findings are not a reason to start, stop or change medication without the prescribing clinician. They are material for a discussion about how treatment progress is assessed and what support may fit the person receiving it.

For readers thinking about maintaining weight loss over time, the same editorial priority applies: keep the goal broader than a lower number on the scale. Weight and everyday capability are related questions worth discussing together.

What this changes: the study does not alter current best practices; it adds observational support for evaluating weight-loss progress alongside body composition and physical function.

How Everfitguys helps

Weight-loss headlines can crowd out questions about everyday capability; Everfitguys keeps those questions in view by explaining what the evidence actually shows. Its editorial coverage helps men after 45 understand muscle-loss research in the context of remaining mobile and independent through work, outdoor activity and daily life.

Read the research