MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4244642694 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14643789.v1

The Bariatric Interprofessional Psychosocial Assessment of Suitability Scale (BIPASS): Predictive Validity for Outcomes 1 and 2 Years Following Bariatric Surgery

2021· preprint· en· W4244642694 on OpenAlexaffabout
Molly E. Atwood

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBariatric Surgery and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychosocialMedicineWeight lossAttendanceQuality of life (healthcare)Predictive validityIntervention (counseling)Scale (ratio)Physical therapyObesityClinical psychologyPsychiatryNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bariatric surgery is the most effective intervention for severe obesity; however, many patients demonstrate insufficient and/or unsustained weight loss, and unsatisfactory psychosocial functioning in the longer-term. Although it is well established that attendance at postsurgical follow-up appointments is integral to sustained weight loss, nonadherence to follow-up is common. Consequently, presurgical psychosocial evaluations are conducted in order to identify patients at high risk of poor outcomes. Yet, no consensus has been established regarding a standardized protocol for the assessment of variables relevant to surgical outcomes, and bariatric programs vary widely in their interpretation of psychosocial risk. In addition, there is a paucity of research examining the predictive utility of psychosocial evaluations. The Bariatric Interprofessional Psychosocial Assessment of Suitability Scale (BIPASSTM), a novel psychosocial evaluation tool, was developed to address these issues. The purpose of the present study was to contribute to the validation of the BIPASS tool via two aims: 1) by examining the psychometric properties of the BIPASS, and; 2) by examining the ability of the BIPASS tool to predict outcomes 1 and 2 years following bariatric surgery, including weight loss and weight regain, quality of life, psychiatric symptoms, and adherence to postsurgical follow-up appointments. The BIPASS was applied retrospectively to the charts of 200 consecutively referred patients of the Toronto Western Hospital Bariatric Surgery Program (TWH-BSP). Factor analysis of BIPASS items revealed a two-factor structure, reflecting “Mental Health” and “Patient Readiness” subscales. Internal consistency for the BIPASS Total and subscale scores ranged from poor to good, and inter-rater reliability was excellent. Higher BIPASS scores significantly predicted higher binge eating symptomatology, and lower physical and mental health-related quality of life at 1 year postsurgery. The BIPASS did not predict any outcome variables at 2 years postsurgery, or adherence to postsurgical follow-up appointments. Findings suggest that the BIPASS can be used to identify patients at increased risk of problematic eating and poor health-related quality of life early in the postsurgical course, thereby facilitating appropriate interventions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBariatric Surgery and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→