Effect of health-care professionals’ weight status on patient satisfaction and recalled advice: a prospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Research has demonstrated that healthcare professionals are not immune to weight stigma attitudes, with evidence showing that people living with overweight or obesity may experience direct and indirect stigma and discrimination. This can impact the quality of care provided and impact patients' engagement in healthcare. Despite this, there is a paucity of research examining patient attitudes towards healthcare professionals living with overweight or obesity, which can also hold implications for the patient–practitioner relationship. Thus, this study examined whether healthcare professionals' weight status impacts patient satisfaction and recalled advice. Methods In this prospective cohort study, using an experimental design, 237 participants (113 women, 125 men) aged 32 ± 8.92 with a body mass index of 25.87 ± 6.79 kg m 2 were recruited through a participant pooling service (ProlificTM), word of mouth, and social media. The majority of participants were from the UK: 119, followed by participants from the USA: 65, Czechia: 16, Canada: 11, and other countries (N = 26). Participants completed an online experiment consisting of questionnaires assessing satisfaction with healthcare professionals and recalled advice after exposure to one of eight conditions assessing the impact of healthcare professional weight status (lower weight or obesity), gender (woman or man) and profession (psychologist or dietitian). A novel approach to creating the stimuli was used to exposure participants to healthcare professionals of different weight status. All of the participants responded to the experiment hosted on Qualtrics™ in the period from June 8, 2016 to July 5, 2017. Study hypotheses were examined using linear regression with dummy variables and follow up post-hoc analysis to estimate marginal means with adjustment for planned comparisons. Findings The only statistically significant result was a difference with a small effect in patient satisfaction, where satisfaction was significantly higher in healthcare professional who was a women living with obesity compared to healthcare professional who was a man living with obesity (estimate = −0.30; SE = 0.08; df = 229; ωₚ 2 = 0.05; CI = −0.49 to −0.11; p < 0.001), and healthcare professional who was a women living with lower weight compared to healthcare professional who was a man living with lower weight (estimate = −0.21; SE = 0.08; df = 229; CI = −0.39 to −0.02; ωₚ 2 = 0.02; p = 0.02). There were no statistically significant differences in satisfaction of healthcare professionals and recall of advice in the lower weight compared to obesity conditions. Interpretation This study has used novel experimental stimuli to examine weight stigma towards healthcare professionals which is vastly under-researched and holds implications for the patient–practitioner relationship. Our findings showed statistically significant differences and a small effect where satisfaction with healthcare professionals both living with obesity and with a lower weight were higher when the healthcare professional was a woman compared to man. This research should act as a stimulus for further research that aims to examine the impact of healthcare professional gender on patient responses, satisfaction and engagement, and weight stigma from patients towards healthcare professionals. Funding Sheffield Hallam University.
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 | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".