Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32552861›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2020

Weight assessment and the provision of weight management advice in primary care: a cross-sectional survey of self-reported practice among general practitioners and practice nurses in the United Kingdom.

Nathan Critchlow, Gillian Rosenberg, Harriet Rumgay, Robert Petty, Jyotsna Vohra

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Consulting Obese and Overweight Patients for Nutrition and Physical Activity in Primary Healthcare in Poland.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nathan CritchlowCancer Policy Research Centre, Cancer Research UK, 2 Redman Place, London, E20 1JQ, UK. nathan.critchlow@stir.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-9145-8874
Gillian RosenbergCancer Policy Research Centre, Cancer Research UK, 2 Redman Place, London, E20 1JQ, UK.
Harriet RumgayCancer Intelligence, Cancer Research UK, 2 Redman Place, London, E20 1JQ, UK.
Robert PettyCancer Policy Research Centre, Cancer Research UK, 2 Redman Place, London, E20 1JQ, UK.
Jyotsna VohraCancer Policy Research Centre, Cancer Research UK, 2 Redman Place, London, E20 1JQ, UK.
Cancer Research UK · GBUniversity of Stirling · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 1111341
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough primary care settings provide a large-scale and high-reach opportunity for weight management and obesity prevention, the proportion of adults in the United Kingdom (UK) who report receiving weight management advice is limited. This study examines the self-reported frequency of assessing weight and providing weight management advice by General Practitioners (GPs) and Practice Nurses (PNs) working in primary care in the UK, and differences by practitioner characteristics.

methodsCross-sectional survey with GPs and PNs in the UK (n = 2020), conducted January-March 2017. A mock consultation exercise assessed what factors led to calculating a patient's Body Mass Index (BMI) and whether weight management advice was given after determining the patient had an obese BMI. For all patients, practitioners were asked how often they calculated BMI, how often they gave weight management advice to patients with an obese BMI, and how often they utilised different advice or referral options (each: Always/Often vs. Less often/Never). Binary logistic regressions examined whether frequency of assessing weight and providing advice was associated with practitioner characteristics.

resultsIn the mock consultation, physical cues (40%) were most likely to prompt calculation of BMI, and half of practitioners (56%) provided weight management advice after determining the patient had an obese BMI, with GPs less likely to do so than PNs (Odds Ratio [OR] = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.47-0.75). Half of practitioners (58%) said they calculated the BMI of all patients Always/Often, with GPs less likely to do so than PNs (OR = 0.27, 95% CI: 0.21-0.34). Three quarters (78%) said they provided weight management advice to patients with an obese BMI Always/Often, with GPs less likely to do so than PNs (OR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.47-0.85). Weight management advice was provided more frequently than referrals, particularly suggesting increased physical activity (93%) and diet modification (89%).

conclusionsConsistent with previous research, the findings suggest that opportunities to provide weight management advice in primary care, including to patients with an obese BMI, are potentially missed. Future research should test alternative mechanisms to increase weight assessment and advice provision, examine the effectiveness of advice frequently given, and seek solutions to reported barriers for providing weight management advice.

Indexed as

Family NursingGeneral PractitionersHealth PromotionObesityPrimary Health CareAdultBody Mass IndexBody Weights and MeasuresCross-Sectional StudiesDiet TherapyExerciseFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedReferral and ConsultationGeneral practitionersNursesObesityObesity policyOverweightPrimary careSurveyWeight assessmentWeight management

Identifiers

PMID32552861
PMCPMC7304118
OpenAlexW3035813950

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.