ArticleObesity facts2017
Public Support for Weight-Related Antidiscrimination Laws and Policies.
Article in Obesity facts, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Does weight-related stigmatisation and discrimination depend on educational attainment and level of income? A systematic review.BMJ open · 2019Pooled it
- Beyond forced translation: obesity, disability and the case for autonomous protection against weight discrimination.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Obesity Stigma: Causes, Consequences, and Potential Solutions.Current obesity reports · 2023Review
- Predictors of support for anti-weight discrimination policies among Canadian adults.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Policies to address weight discrimination and bullying: Perspectives of adults engaged in weight management from six nations.Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.) · 2021Article
- Weight Stigma and Disease and Disability Concepts of Obesity: A Survey of the German Population.Obesity facts · 2021Article
- Joint international consensus statement for ending stigma of obesity.Nature medicine · 2020Review
- Validation of a Three-Item Short Form of the Modified Weight Bias Internalization Scale (WBIS-3) in the German Population.Obesity facts · 2020Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWeight-related discrimination is prevalent and associated with health impairments for those who are targeted, which underscores the need of antidiscrimination legislation. This study is the first to examine public support of weight-related antidiscrimination laws or policies in Germany, compared to the US and Iceland.
methodsIn a representative German population sample (N = 2,513), public support for general and employment-specific weight-related antidiscrimination policies, weight-based victimization, and weight bias internalization were measured through established self-report questionnaires.
resultsHalf of the German population sample agreed with antidiscrimination policies. General antidiscrimination laws received lower support than employment-specific laws. Support for policies considering obesity a physical disability was greatest in Germany, whereas support for employment-specific antidiscrimination laws was lower in Germany than in the US and Iceland. Total support for weight-related antidiscrimination policies was significantly predicted by lower age, female gender, obese weight status, residence in West Germany, church membership, and readiness to vote in elections.
conclusionGerman support for weight-related antidiscrimination policies is moderate. Increasing awareness about weight-related discrimination and laws prohibiting this behavior may help to promote policy acceptance.
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.