MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382683250 · doi:10.31080/asnh.2023.07.1255

Knowledge and Perception of Bariatric Surgery Among Primary Care Physicians, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

2023· article· en· W4382683250 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ibraheem Alsmari, Abdulmjeed Alshaikh, Saeed Mohammed Albaqih, Turkiah Alotaibi, Mostafa Kofi

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Scientifci Nutritional Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicObesity and Health Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrimary carePerceptionMedicineFamily medicinePrimary health careGeneral surgeryPsychologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Obesity is one of the most common health problems in Saudi Arabia affecting people of both gender and all ages.Primary care physicians are key health personnel that encounters obese patients regularly.However, few physicians are knowledgeable about the management of morbid obesity, especially surgical treatment and procedures.Objective: To provide information contributing to the improvement of the knowledge and perception among primary care physicians about bariatric surgery, and their ability to care for patients who suffer from morbid obesity. Methods:The study design was cross-sectional.The study population was Primary care physicians working at Prince Sultan Military Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.A questionnaire developed by researchers of the university health network -Toronto adapted and modified to fit the setting of practice in the study population.The questionnaire was distributed among the physicians over 3 waves until 170 completed questionnaires were collected.Results: Of the total 170 respondents, Most of the participants (64.1%) reported measuring their patient's weight on each clinic visit.The majority (97.6%) used BMI to assess the weight of a patient (88.8%) of respondents had referred obese patients for bariatric surgery.The majority of responses admits the lack of knowledge for all types of surgery in question.Regarding the questions in the survey, a significant difference in the comparison between those who referred versus who did not refer patients to bariatric surgery is obvious in the percentage of morbidly obese patients seen in the last 12 months (p-value 0.015) and the ideal bariatric procedure in average patients (p-value 0.043). Conclusions and Recommendations:The study conclude that the knowledge of physicians in the bariatric surgical treatment of morbid obesity is insufficient.More guidelines and continuing education should be emphasized regularly to the physicians in order to improve their knowledge on management of obesity.

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)0.003
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 score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.343 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Scientifci Nutritional HealthSame topicObesity and Health PracticesFrench-language works237,207