Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34710172›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Clinical usefulness of brief screening tool for activating weight management discussions in primary cARE (AWARE): A nationwide mixed methods pilot study.

Evan Atlantis, James Rufus John, Paul Patrick Fahey, Samantha Hocking, Kath Peters

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Using FIGO Nutrition Checklist counselling in pregnancy: A review to support healthcare professionals.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2023
    Review
  6. 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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Evan AtlantisSchool of Health Sciences, Western Sydney University, Penrith, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5877-6141
James Rufus JohnBestSTART-SWS, South Western Sydney Local Health District, Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia.
Paul Patrick FaheySchool of Health Sciences, Western Sydney University, Penrith, New South Wales, Australia.
Samantha HockingThe Boden Collaboration for Obesity, Nutrition, Exercise & Eating Disorders, Charles Perkins Centre, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia.
Kath PetersSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, Western Sydney University, Penrith, New South Wales, Australia.
The University of Sydney · AUWestern Sydney University · AUUNSW Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe Edmonton Obesity Staging System (EOSS) is based on weight related health complications among individuals with overweight and obesity requiring clinical intervention. We aimed to assess the clinical usefulness of a new screening tool based on the EOSS for activating weight management discussions in general practice.

methodsWe enrolled five General Practitioners (GPs) and 25 of their patients located nationwide in metropolitan areas of Australia to test the feasibility, acceptability, and accuracy of the new 'EOSS-2 Risk Tool', using cross-sectional and qualitative study designs. Diagnostic accuracy of the tool for the presence of EOSS ≥2 criteria was based on clinical information collected prospectively. To assess feasibility and applicability, we explored the views of GP and patient participants by thematic analysis of transcribed verbatim and de-identified data collected by semi-structured telephone interviews.

resultsNineteen (76%) patients were aged ≥45 years, five (20%) were male, and 20 (80%) were classified with obesity. All 25 patients screened positive for EOSS ≥2 criteria by the tool. Interviews with patients continued until data saturation was reached resulting in a total of 23 interviews. Our thematic analysis revealed five themes: GP recognition of obesity as a health priority (GPs expressed strong interest in and understanding of its importance as a health priority); obesity stigma (GPs reported the tool helped them initiate health based and non-judgmental conversations with their patients); patient health literacy (GPs and patients reported increased awareness and understanding of weight related health risks), patient motivation for self-management (GPs and patients reported the tool helped focus on self-management of weight related complications), and applicability and scalability (GPs stated it was easy to use, relevant to a range of their patient groups, and scalable if integrated into existing patient management systems).

conclusionThe EOSS-2 Risk Tool is potentially clinically useful for activating weight management discussions in general practice. Further research is required to assess feasibility and applicability.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeAdultFemaleGeneral PractitionersHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatientsPrimary Health CareSelf-ManagementSensitivity and SpecificityWeight Reduction Programs

Identifiers

PMID34710172
PMCPMC8553075
OpenAlexW3208330444

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.