Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31089502›Full record

ReviewJournal of obesity & metabolic syndrome2017

Revisional Bariatric Surgery: Focus on Quality of Life.

Claire Alexandra Zhen Chew, Asim Shabbir

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of obesity & metabolic syndrome, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Claire Alexandra Zhen ChewDepartment of Surgery, National University Hospital, Singapore.
Asim ShabbirDepartment of Surgery, Division of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, National University Hospital, Singapore.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bariatric surgery is considered to be the most effective treatment for morbid obesity. At present, revisional surgery is considered in patients who experience complications, or in whom the intended weight loss is not achieved. However, as there is no consensus on what constitutes failure of primary surgery, there are no guidelines on who should receive revisional surgery. Physical parameters alone may be insufficient and quality of life has emerged as an alternative to provide a holistic appraisal of the outcome of primary surgery and the need for further revisional surgery in bariatric patients. Quality of life surveys such as short form health survey (SF-36) or Moorehead-Ardelt II (MA-II) assess the patients' perception of their weight and can also be used to assess the impact of post-operative complications such as gastro-esophageal reflux disease or dysphagia. However, unrealistic expectations of weight loss have been shown to be prevalent in bariatric patients and patients who seek revisional surgery on the basis of disappointment with the primary outcome are unlikely to be satisfied with the revisional outcome. Indications for re-operative surgery must be tailored to improve the quality and longevity of each individual patient's life. Long term studies are required to investigate and validate quality of life as an indication for revisional surgery.

Indexed as

Bariatric surgeryQuality of lifeWeight loss

Identifiers

PMID31089502
PMCPMC6484905

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.