Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25927993›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2015

Interventions targeted at primary care practitioners to improve the identification and referral of patients with co-morbid obesity: a realist review protocol.

David N Blane, Sara Macdonald, David Morrison, Catherine A O'Donnell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Epidemiology of adult overweight recording and management by UK GPs: a systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2017
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. What works and why in the identification and referral of adults with comorbid obesity in primary care: A realist review.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2020
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Knowledge, attitudes and management skills of medical practitioners regarding weight management.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2016
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
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

4 authors.

David N BlaneGeneral Practice and Primary Care, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, 1 Horselethill Road, Glasgow, G12 9LX, UK. David.blane@glasgow.ac.uk.
Sara MacdonaldGeneral Practice and Primary Care, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, 1 Horselethill Road, Glasgow, G12 9LX, UK. Sara.macdonald@glasgow.ac.uk.
David MorrisonPublic Health, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, 1 Lilybank Gardens, Glasgow, G12 8RZ, UK. David.morrison@glasgow.ac.uk.
Catherine A O'DonnellGeneral Practice and Primary Care, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, 1 Horselethill Road, Glasgow, G12 9LX, UK. Kate.ODonnell@glasgow.ac.uk.

Funding

Chief Scientist Office CAF/13/13Chief Scientist Office CAF13/13
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundObesity is one of the most significant public health challenges in the developed world. Recent policy has suggested that more can be done in primary care to support adults with obesity. In particular, general practitioners (GPs) and practice nurses (PNs) could improve the identification and referral of adults with obesity to appropriate weight management services. Previous interventions targeted at primary care practitioners in this area have had mixed results, suggesting a more complex interplay between patients, practitioners, and systems. The objectives of this review are (i) to identify the underlying 'programme theory' of interventions targeted at primary care practitioners to improve the identification and referral of adults with obesity and (ii) to explore how and why GPs and PNs identify and refer individuals with obesity, particularly in the context of weight-related co-morbidity. This protocol will explain the rationale for using a realist review approach and outline the key steps in this process.

methodsRealist review is a theory-led approach to knowledge synthesis that provides an explanatory analysis aimed at discerning what works, for whom, in what circumstances, how, and why. In this review, scoping interviews with key stakeholders involved in the planning and delivery of adult weight management services in Scotland helped to inform the identification of formal theories - from psychology, sociology, and implementation science - that will be tested as the review progresses. A comprehensive search strategy is described, including scope for iterative searching. Data analysis is outlined in three stages (describing context-mechanism-outcome configurations, exploring patterns in these configurations, and developing and testing middle-range theories, informed by the formal theories previously identified), culminating in the production of explanatory programme theory that considers individual, interpersonal, and institutional/systems-level components. DISCUSSION: This is the first realist review that we are aware of looking at interventions targeted at primary care practitioners to improve the weight management of adults with obesity. Engagement with stakeholders at an early stage is a unique feature of realist review. This shapes the scope of the review, identification of candidate theories and dissemination strategies. The findings of this review will inform policy and future interventions. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42014009391.

Indexed as

Quality ImprovementReferral and ConsultationClinical ProtocolsComorbidityDelivery of Health CareHumansObesity, MorbidPrimary Health CareProfessional RoleResearch DesignSystematic Reviews as Topic

Identifiers

PMID25927993
PMCPMC4426175

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.