ArticlePloS one2017
Lifestyle intervention program in deprived obese adult patients and their non-deprived counterparts.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
introductionAlthough it is known that the prevalence of obesity is high in deprived patients, the link between deprivation and obesity, and the impact of deprivation on compliance and efficacy of a lifestyle intervention program are not known. MATERIALS AND
methodsDeprivation was assessed in 40 patients (23 Females, mean±SD age: 49±17 years) from the diabetology department and 140 patients (101 Females, age: 50±15 years) from the nutrition department of Bordeaux University hospital. Eighty-seven patients suffering from obesity were evaluated before and after a tailored, multidisciplinary lifestyle intervention. Deprivation was assessed using EPICES scores. Deprivation was defined with an EPICES score > 30.
resultsDeprived patients suffering from obesity had significantly higher current (43.8 ±8.4 versus 40.9 ± 5.5 kg/m2, p = 0,02) and maximal BMI (46.1± 8.6 versus 42.3± 5.2 kg/m2, p = 0.002) compared to non-deprived obese. Percentage of body weight loss was not different according to deprivation (4.74 ± 0.75 versus 4.65 ± 1.04%, p = 0.9). EPICES scores were not different according to adherence to lifestyle intervention program (20.5 ± 8.5 versus 29.9 ± 3.9 versus 29.0 ±2.5, no follow up versus partial follow up versus total follow up, p = 0,58).
conclusionDeprived patients suffering from obesity have a more serious disease than non-deprived patients. However, neither compliance to the lifestyle intervention program nor body weight loss differed between deprived patients with obesity and non-deprived ones. Deprivation should not be a limitation when enrolling patients with obesity in lifestyle intervention programs.
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.