Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29162575›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2017

Patient and practice characteristics predicting attendance and completion at a specialist weight management service in the UK: a cross-sectional study.

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

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. 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

5 authors.

David N BlaneGeneral Practice and Primary Care, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3872-3621
Philip McLoonePublic Health, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
David MorrisonPublic Health, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Sara MacdonaldGeneral Practice and Primary Care, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Catherine A O'DonnellGeneral Practice and Primary Care, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5368-3779

Funding

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

Abstract

objectiveTo determine the association between patient and referring practice characteristics and attendance and completion at a specialist health service weight management service (WMS).

designCross-sectional study.

settingRegional specialist WMS located in the West of Scotland.

participants9677 adults with obesity referred between 2012 and 2014; 3250 attending service and 2252 completing. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measure was attendance at the WMS; secondary outcome was completion, defined as attending four or more sessions. ANALYSIS: Multilevel binary logistic regression models constructed to determine the association between patient and practice characteristics and attendance and completion.

resultsApproximately one-third of the 9677 obese adults referred attended at least one session (n=3250, 33.6%); only 2252 (23%) completed by attending four or more sessions. Practice referrals ranged from 1 to 257. Patient-level characteristics were strongest predictors of attendance; odds of attendance increased with age (OR 4.14, 95% CI 3.27 to 5.26 for adults aged 65+ compared with those aged 18-24), body mass index (BMI) category (OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.56 to 2.15 for BMI 45+ compared with BMI 30-35) and increasing affluence (OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.17 to 3.28). Practice-level characteristics most strongly associated with attendance were being a non-training practice, having a larger list size and not being located in the most deprived areas.

conclusionsThere was wide variation in referral rates across general practice, suggesting that there is still much to do to improve engagement with weight management by primary care practitioners. The high attrition rate from referral to attendance and from attendance to completion suggests ongoing barriers for patients, particularly those from the most socioeconomically deprived areas. Patient and practice-level characteristics can help us understand the observed variation in attendance at specialist WMS following general practitioner (GP) referral and the underlying explanations for these differences merit further investigation.

Indexed as

General PracticeGeneral PractitionersPatient Acceptance of Health CarePractice Patterns, Physicians'Referral and ConsultationSpecializationAdolescentAdultAgedBody Mass IndexBody WeightCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsMaleco-morbiditydisparitiesobesityprimary caresocioeconomic statusweight management

Identifiers

PMID29162575
PMCPMC5719278

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.