Feasibility of an interdisciplinary program for obesity management in Canada.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility of a medically supervised, publicly funded interdisciplinary program for obesity management in a Canadian setting. DESIGN: Retrospective chart audit using electronic medical records. SETTING: Wharton Medical Clinic in Hamilton and Burlington, Ont. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 2739 consenting patients attending the interdisciplinary obesity-management program at Wharton Medical Clinic. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Three- and 6-month weight changes and factors affecting weight loss. RESULTS: The 1085 patients attending the clinic for at least 3 months (mean [SD] of 8.1 [6.1] visits and 5.4 [4.7] months) lost a mean (SD) of 4.2 (7.1) kg or 3.5% (6.8%) of their initial body weight, with 32% and 9% of these patients attaining weight reductions of 5% or greater and 10% or greater, respectively. The 289 patients attending the clinic for 6 months or more (mean [SD] of 13.2 [9.7] visits and 10.5 [6.9] months) lost a mean (SD) of 5.4 (10.6) kg or 4.3% (9.2%) of their initial body weight, with 47% and 17% attaining reductions of 5% or greater and 10% or greater, respectively. Visit frequency was positively associated with weight loss independent of age, sex, body mass index, and treatment duration. CONCLUSION: Preliminary data support the short-term effectiveness and clinical utility of this publicly funded program. Using this interdisciplinary model, approximately half of patients were able to attain clinically significant weight loss.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".