Outcomes of the adjustable gastric band in a publicly funded obesity program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) is considered a safe and effective treatment for severe obesity and obesity-related comorbidities. We sought to examine the outcome of LAGB delivered through a Canadian publicly funded obesity program. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed the cases of patients who underwent LAGB within a comprehensive, multidisciplinary, publically funded obesity program. RESULTS: A total of 178 patients underwent LAGB. Mean percentage total body weight loss at 1, 2 and 3 years was 15.8%, 20.7% and 20.3%, respectively. The most common short-term complication was postoperative nausea (19%). The medium-term complications included band migration (5.6%) and port site complications, band leakage and incisional hernia at 1% each. The reoperation rate was 4.5%. The mean surgery duration was 56 minutes and the mean length of stay was 1.4 days. The average numbers of clinic visits and band adjustments were highest in the first year. The most common investigation for postoperative symptoms was fluoroscopy (86%). An outcome comparison between the 2 generations of the REALIZE gastric band was inconclusive, requiring further data collection. CONCLUSION: Publicly funded LAGB results in effective weight loss and acceptable safety over the short term. Our patients may represent a distinct population that differs from that in the private system. Long-term data are necessary to determine the cost-effectiveness of this important surgical option for severe obesity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".