Canadian Health Care Providers’ Attitudes and Practices Towards \nPharmacotherapy and Bariatric Surgery in Youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Behavioural therapy and lifestyle modifications are pillars of obesity management treatment. However, other treatment options like bariatric surgery (BarSx) and pharmacotherapy \n(Pharm) are gaining more and more interest. Little is known about healthcare providers’(HCPs) attitudes towards pediatric obesity treatments in Canada. The purpose of this study was to explore the prior knowledge, attitudes and practices (i.e., frequency of treatment recommendations, referrals to specialists) of Canadian HCPs towards pharmacotherapy (Pharm) and bariatric surgery (BarSx) in children and adolescents. We also examined familiarity with pediatric obesity guidelines, differences in attitudes with regards to the type of HCP, prior obesity training and levels of confidence treating obesity and definitions of pediatric obesity management success. \nMethods. Canadian physicians, nurse practitioners and medical residents completed 39 multiple choice and open-ended questions on LimeSurvey from October 2021 until September 2022. Participants were recruited through convenience and snowball sampling across Canada. Chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests compared attitudes between respondents who were familiar versus unfamiliar with pediatric obesity guidelines. Kruskal-Wallis tests and independent sample t-tests were used to analyze our exploratory objectives. \nResults. A total of 130 HCPs responded to the survey. Of the respondents, 78% identified as women, 49% were physicians, 39% resided in Ontario, 54% had received pediatric obesity training before working in the field, 48% were most familiar with the 2015 Canadian Task Force Guidelines whereas only 12% were familiar with the 2018 American Society for Metabolic BarSx guidelines. HCPs did not respond favorably towards Pharm and BarSx. Responses varied regarding agreement about the effectiveness, safety, usefulness and willingness to refer adolescents and children. For Pharm, 48% of respondents agreed that it is an effective intervention in adolescents compared to 23% that agreed in children. As for BarSx, only 16% of respondents agreed that it’s a useful treatment for obesity-related co-morbidities in children compared to 47% who agreed that it was useful in adolescents. In general, there was more disagreement in regard to responses for children compared to adolescents. Reasons chosen for HCPs’ reluctance to refer were lack of long-term data (Pharm: 58%, BarSx: 41%) and patients’ unrealistic outcome expectations (Pharm: 45%, BarSx: 49%). Referrals to medical specialists (74%), like dietitians (85%), and multidisciplinary programs (61%) were the most common referrals for patients. \nConclusion. Pharmacotherapy and bariatric surgery are not highly endorsed by Canadian HCPs. Future studies should investigate other barriers to treatment recommendations, such as HCPs’ knowledge on obesity and potential bias towards the causes of obesity and severe obesity in youth.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".