MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037778520 · doi:10.1097/mlr.0000000000000070

Weight Loss and Outcomes in Wait-listed, Medically Managed, and Surgically Treated Patients Enrolled in a Population-based Bariatric Program

2013· article· en· W2037778520 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Raj Padwal, Christian F. Rueda‐Clausen, Arya M. Sharma, Calypse Agborsangaya, Scott Klarenbach, Daniel W. Birch, Shahzeer Karmali, Linda McCargar, Sumit R. Majumdar

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Care · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBariatric Surgery and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineBody mass indexWeight lossObservational studyPopulationSleeve gastrectomyWeight changeCohort studyCohortProspective cohort studySurgeryObesityInternal medicineGastric bypass

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary bariatric care is increasingly being delivered in Canada within publicly funded regional programs. Demand is high, wait lists are long, and clinical effectiveness is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To examine the "real-world" outcomes associated with a publicly funded, population-based regional bariatric (medical and surgical) program. RESEARCH DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort. SUBJECTS: Five hundred consecutive patients (150 wait-listed, 200 medically treated, 150 surgically treated) from the Edmonton Weight Wise program were enrolled. MEASURES: The primary outcome was weight change (kg). Between-group changes were analyzed using multivariable regression adjusted for age, sex, and baseline weight and "last-observation-carried-forward" was used for missing data. Subjects transitioning between groups (wait-list to medical or medical to surgery) were censored when crossing over. RESULTS: At baseline, mean age was 43.7 ± 9.6 years, mean body mass index was 47.9 ± 8.1 kg/m, and 88% were female. A total of 412 subjects (82%) completed 2-year follow-up and 143 (29%) subjects crossed over to the next treatment phase. Absolute and relative (% of baseline) mean weight reductions were 1.5 ± 8.5 kg (0.9 ± 6.1%) for wait-listed, 4.1 ± 11.6 kg (2.8 ± 8.1%) for medically treated, and 22.0 ± 19.7 kg (16.3 ± 13.5%) for surgically treated (P<0.001) subjects. For surgery, weight reductions were 7.0 ± 9.7 kg (5.8 ± 7.9%) with banding, 21.4 ± 16.0 kg (16.4 ± 11.6%) with sleeve gastrectomy, and 36.6 ± 19.5 kg (26.1 ± 12.2%) with gastric bypass (P<0.001). Rates of hypertension, diabetes, and dyslipidemia decreased to a significantly greater degree with surgery than medical management (P<0.001) and stayed the same or increased in wait-listed subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Population-based bariatric care, particularly bariatric surgery, was clinically effective. Weight and cardiometabolic risk was relatively stable wait-listed patients receiving "usual care."

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.846

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations32
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical CareSame topicBariatric Surgery and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207