Trial reportObesity surgery2013
Solid versus liquid-satiety study in well-adjusted lap-band patients.
Trial report in Obesity surgery, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Position statement on nutrition therapy for overweight and obesity: nutrition department of the Brazilian association for the study of obesity and metabolic syndrome (ABESO-2022).Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2023Review
- Insights into the constellating drivers of satiety impacting dietary patterns and lifestyle.Frontiers in nutrition · 2022Review
- Discretionary food and beverage consumption and its association with demographic characteristics, weight status, and fruit and vegetable intakes in Australian adults.Public health nutrition · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients following laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) are generally advised to avoid liquid calories, opt for solids and refrain from drinking with meals as this is believed to prolong satiety. The role of food consistency and satiety following LAGB is largely uninvestigated. The purpose of the study was to: (1) determine if food consistency impacts on post meal satiety in participants with well-adjusted LAGB and (2) compare the level of satiety achieved after consuming a solid versus a liquid meal between groups.
methodsTwenty intervention (well-adjusted LAGB) and 20 control participants were recruited. All participants consumed three iso-caloric breakfasts that were randomised for nine mornings. Participants were asked to rate their satiety on visual analogue scales (VAS) at set times after the test meal. Areas under the curve (AUC) VAS scores were compared within and between groups.
resultsSolids (bars) with or without water provided greater satiety than the liquids (shakes) for both groups. Drinking water with the bar did influence satiety in the intervention group. For the intervention group (LAGB), AUC VAS values for the bar with water were 77.4 ± 11.2* and 72.4 ± 16.7* for the controls.
conclusionSolid meals are more satisfying in both LAGB and non-LAGB individuals. However, a solid meal with accompanying water did not alter meal satiety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.