Obesity in adults: Clinical practice guideline adapted for Chile
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The Chilean Society of Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery, together with other scientific societies, led a process for adapting the Canadian clinical practice guideline for obesity in adults for Chile. The aim of the Canadian guideline, among its main objectives, was to propose changes in obesity management using a chronic disease framework and focusing on improving patient-centered health outcomes, rather than focusing on weight loss alone. Methods: A group of 58 healthcare professionals applied the GRADE-Adolopment method to analyze and adapt the original recommendations and to create de novo recommendations. New recommendations were developed through a systematic review of the evidence using the Epistemonikos database and based on the GRADE-Evidence to Decision (EtD) framework. Results: Seventy-six (76) of the 80 original recommendations were adopted, one recommendation was adapted, and 12 new recommendations were created. Conclusions: The adaptation process reduced the time needed to develop a Chilean clinical practice guideline for the management of obesity in adults. The change in obesity management approaches towards non-stigmatizing and patient-centered strategies focused on improving health outcomes and not solely on weight reduction is universal and it is possible to apply this approach in different countries and contexts.
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 | 0.014 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".