MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406603597 · doi:10.1111/obr.13885

Determinants of adherence to obesity medication: A narrative review

2025· review· en· W4406603597 on OpenAlexaff
Arya M. Sharma, Susie Birney, Michael Crotty, Nick Finer, Gabriella Segal‐Lieberman, Verónica Vázquez‐Velázquez, Bernard Vrijens

Bibliographic record

VenueObesity Reviews · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedication Adherence and Compliance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNovo Nordisk
KeywordsMedicineObesityDyslipidemiaType 2 diabetesWeight lossDiscontinuationManagement of obesityDiabetes mellitusPsychological interventionWeight managementIntensive care medicineDiseaseGerontologyPhysical therapyInternal medicinePsychiatryEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing prevalence of obesity, complex nature of this chronic disease, and risks of developing obesity-related comorbidities outline the need for sustainable and effective management for people living with obesity. In addition to behavioral interventions, obesity medications (OMs) are increasingly considered an integral part of management of people living with obesity. OM adherence is essential to achieve the health benefits of these medications. Adherence to medications, defined as the process by which patients take their medications as prescribed, is determined by a range of factors and can be broken down into phases: initiation, implementation, and persistence (the persistence phase includes discontinuation/stopping treatment). Obesity-specific challenges exist to optimize OM adherence, which may explain varying OM adherence compared with medication for other chronic diseases (diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and osteoporosis). However, lessons can be learned from other chronic diseases to improve OM adherence, for example from type 2 diabetes and hypertension. This review aims to provide practical guidance for identifying OM- and obesity-specific determinants of adherence and discusses adherence determinants per adherence phase and obesity management phase (weight gain, weight loss, and weight stabilization/regain). This practical guidance will assist with developing obesity-specific interventions to improve OM adherence. PRACTITIONER POINTS: OMs are increasingly considered as an integral part of obesity management; however, like with all chronic disease medications, low adherence to these medications is often observed, impacting their therapeutic effect. Adherence to obesity medication can be affected at any phase of obesity management (weight gain, weight loss, and weight stabilization/regain) so considering the disease phase can help identify potential reasons for low adherence. Future initiatives to improve adherence to obesity medication should be a key focus of discussions at each opportunity with healthcare professionals, including thorough evaluation and targeted education, all in a supportive and stigma-free manner.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.610
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.005

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.316 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations24
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObesity ReviewsSame topicMedication Adherence and ComplianceFrench-language works237,207