Real‐World Clinical Effectiveness of Liraglutide 3.0 mg for Weight Management in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Real-world clinical effectiveness of liraglutide 3.0 mg, in combination with diet and exercise, was investigated 4 and 6 months post initiation. Changes in absolute and percent body weight were examined from baseline. METHODS: A cohort of liraglutide 3.0 mg initiators in 2015 and 2016 was identified from six Canadian weight-management clinics. Post initiation values at 4 and 6 months were compared with baseline values using a paired t test. RESULTS: , and weight was 114.8 kg. There was a significant change in body weight 6 and 4 months after initiation of treatment in persistent subjects (≥ 6-month: -8.0 kg, P < 0.001; ≥ 4-month: -7.0 kg, P < 0.001) and All Subjects, regardless of persistence (-7.3 kg; P < 0.001). Percentage change in body weight from baseline was -7.1% in the ≥ 6-month group and -6.3% in the ≥ 4-month group, and All Subjects lost 6.5% body weight. Of participants in the ≥ 6-month group, 64.10% and 34.5% lost ≥ 5% and > 10% body weight, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In a real-world setting, liraglutide 3.0 mg, when combined with diet and exercise, was associated with clinically meaningful 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 | 0.001 | 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".