Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19763700›Full record

Trial reportJournal of general internal medicine2009

Physician respect for patients with obesity.

Mary Margaret Huizinga, Lisa A Cooper, Sara N Bleich, Jeanne M Clark, Mary Catherine Beach

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of general internal medicine, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 74 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
74citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

74 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Implicit and explicit weight bias among healthcare professionals.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2025
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Views of patients with obesity on person-centred care: A Q-methodology study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Weight bias and stigmatisation: what is it and what can we do about it?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2019
    Article

14 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Mary Margaret HuizingaDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 2024 East Monument Street, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA. mhuizin1@jhmi.edu
Lisa A Cooper
Sara N Bleich
Jeanne M Clark
Mary Catherine Beach

Funding

Multidisciplinary Clinical Research Career Development (RMI)K12RR023266 · NCRR · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI POWE, NEIL R. · 2005 to 2007
$6.0M
Patient-Physician Partnership to Improve HBP AdherenceR01HL069403 · NHLBI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI COOPER, LISA A · 2001 to 2004
$2.5M
Patient-Oriented Research in Cardiovascular DisparitiesK24HL083113 · NHLBI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI COOPER, LISA A · 2006 to 2015
$2.0M
NCRR NIH HHS 5K12RR023266NCRR NIH HHS K12 RR023266NHLBI NIH HHS K24 HL083113NHLBI NIH HHS K24HL083113NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL069403NHLBI NIH HHS R01HL069403
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionObesity stigma is common in our society, and a general stigma towards obesity has also been documented in physicians. We hypothesized that physician respect for patients would be lower in patients with higher body mass index (BMI).

methodsWe analyzed data from the baseline visit of 40 physicians and 238 patients enrolled in a randomized controlled trial of patient-physician communication. The independent variable was BMI, and the outcome was physician respect for the patient. We performed Poisson regression analyses with robust variance estimates, accounting for clustering of patients within physicians, to examine the association between BMI and physician ratings of respect for particular patients.

resultsThe mean (SD) BMI of the patients was 32.9(8.1) kg/m(2). Physicians had low respect for 39% of the participants. Higher BMI was significantly and negatively associated with respect [prevalence ratio (PrR) 0.83, 95% CI: 0.73-0.95; p = 0.006; per 10 kg/m(2) increase in BMI]. BMI remained significantly associated with respect after adjustment for patient age and gender (PrR 0.86, 95%CI: 0.74-1.00; p = 0.049).

conclusionWe found that higher patient BMI was associated with lower physician respect. Further research is needed to understand if lower physician respect for patients with higher BMI adversely affects the quality of care.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelBody Mass IndexPhysician-Patient RelationsPrejudiceAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedObesityPatient Satisfaction

Identifiers

PMID19763700
PMCPMC2771236

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.