A Remotely Delivered Weight Management Service to Support Existing Obesity Services in the UK National Health Service: Preliminary Findings From an Early-Stage Service Evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Specialist weight management services (SWMS) in the UK National Health Service (NHS) face long waiting lists and limited resources. Remotely-delivered SWMSs may support existing NHS services to increase access to treatment for patients living with obesity, however evidence of remotely-delivered services working to support NHS SWMSs in practice remains limited. OBJECTIVE: This service evaluation explored the potential effectiveness, feasibility and acceptability of Second Nature's remotely-delivered SWMS for adults living with obesity referred from existing NHS SWMSs. Preliminary findings from the first phase ('Preparing for weight loss') of a three-phase remotely-delivered SWMS are presented. METHODS: A total of 39 adults (age range 23-74 years, mean age 45.6, SD 12.1; 74% female) completed a 16-week intervention, following referral from NHS SWMS leads. Eligible participants were assessed by a multidisciplinary team and allocated to one of three interventions: 1) a psychologically informed app-based intervention, 2) a Dialectical behavioral Therapy (DBT)-based skills training group intervention and 3) one-to-one psychological support. Primary outcomes were weight change (kg) and percentage weight change following completion of the intervention. Secondary outcomes included psychological distress, emotional eating, health-related quality of life, physical activity, emotion regulation, intervention feasibility and acceptability. RESULTS: At 16-weeks, the mean weight change was -2.2 kg (SD 5.16), or -1.6% of body weight . Participants in the app-based intervention lost the most weight (-2.8kg), and participants in the one-to-one psychological support intervention lost the least weight (-1.3kg). Psychological distress reduced to below the clinical threshold (mean score 0.95, SD 0.62). Emotional eating behaviors and difficulties in emotion regulation also decreased (mean change scores -3.2, SD 6.4 and -11.6, SD 13.9, respectively). Health-related quality of life saw improvements in self-care, usual activities and anxiety/depression , while participants' challenges with mobility and pain/discomfort remained unaffected. Subjective ratings of health status improved by 17.4%. There were no significant changes in physical activity levels, with most participants remaining 'Inactive' or 'Moderately inactive'. Engagement with intervention sessions was high (93.7%) and attrition rate was 27.4%. Participants rated their satisfaction with the intervention at 9/10 and highlighted key benefits including improved mental wellbeing, healthier habits, and supportive coach relationships. Suggested improvements included greater scheduling flexibility, enhanced app functionality, and more accessible physical activity support. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary service evaluation suggests that a remotely delivered SWMS has the potential to be effective, feasible and acceptable for NHS-referred patients in the UK. Changes observed across several key measures point to clinically significant benefits, reinforcing the potential of this approach. A full evaluation of all three phases of this service with a larger sample size is required to support these early findings.
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 | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".