ArticleObesity (Silver Spring, Md.)2023
Real-time versus retrospective self-report assessment of loss-of-control eating in adults undergoing bariatric surgery.
Article in Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveLoss-of-control (LOC) eating is common in adults undergoing bariatric surgery. Agreement between real-time and retrospective assessment methods is unclear.
methodsAdults with severe obesity reported on LOC eating over the preceding 28 days via Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire (EDE-Q) items and in near real time over 10 days via ecological momentary assessment (EMA; involving daily repeated surveys delivered via smartphone in the natural environment), with both assessment forms completed before surgery and at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Wilcoxon signed rank tests and generalized linear mixed models were used to compare participants' EDE-Q and EMA reports of subjectively and objectively large LOC episodes across time points.
resultsParticipants reported subjectively large LOC episodes more frequently via EMA than EDE-Q across time points, although differences did not reach statistical significance (all p > 0.05). Conversely, objectively large LOC episodes were more frequently reported via EDE-Q than EMA, with differences reaching significance at 6 months post surgery only (p = 0.03).
conclusionsAgreement between real-time and retrospective assessments of LOC eating varied by episode size and time elapsed in the year following surgery. These findings should be considered when designing assessment batteries for bariatric surgery-seeking adults and when extrapolating research findings across studies with diverging methods of real-time versus retrospective self-report assessment of LOC eating in adults undergoing bariatric surgery.
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.