ArticleObesity surgery2015
Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banding (LAGB) Aftercare Attendance and Attrition.
Article in Obesity surgery, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychological predictors of adherence to lifestyle changes after bariatric surgery: A systematic review.Obesity science & practice · 2024Review
- Pre-operative Bariatric Clinic Attendance Is a Predictor of Post-operative Clinic Attendance and Weight Loss Outcomes.Obesity surgery · 2019Article
- The use of adjustable gastric bands for management of severe and complex obesity.British medical bulletin · 2016Review
- Development of a Measure of Barriers to Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banding (LAGB) Aftercare Attendance.Obesity surgery · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRegular aftercare attendance following laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) is associated with greater weight loss and fewer post-surgical complications. Despite high reported rates of attrition from LAGB aftercare, the reasons for non-attendance have not been previously explored. The present study aimed to explore patient-reported barriers to LAGB aftercare attendance, and the perceived helpfulness of potential attrition-reducing strategies, in both regular attendees and non-attendees of aftercare.
methodsOne hundred and seventy-nine participants (107 regular attendees and 72 non-attendees) completed a semi-structured questionnaire, assessing barriers to attrition (101 items) and usefulness of attrition prevention strategies (14 items).
resultsFindings indicate that both regular attendees and non-attendees experience multiple barriers to aftercare attendance. Non-attendees generally reported that barriers had a greater impact on their aftercare attendance. There was evidence for some level of acceptability for attrition-reducing strategies suggesting that LAGB patients may be receptive to such strategies.
conclusionsCurrent findings highlight the importance of assessing barriers to treatment in both attendees and non-attendees. It is proposed that addressing barriers that differentiate non-attendees from attendees may be most effective in reducing attrition from aftercare.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25670531What 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.