Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37769031›Full record

Observational studyPLoS medicine2023

Access to publicly funded weight management services in England using routine data from primary and secondary care (2007-2020): An observational cohort study.

Karen D Coulman, Ruta Margelyte, Tim Jones, Jane M Blazeby, John Macleod, Amanda Owen-Smith, Helen Parretti, Richard Welbourn, Maria Theresa Redaniel, Andy Judge

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in PLoS medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Tirzepatide and the NHS: are we creating a two-tier obesity treatment system?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

10 authors.

Karen D CoulmanHealth Economics Bristol, Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0510-4290
Ruta MargelyteThe National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration West (NIHR ARC West), University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7914-8037
Tim JonesHealth Economics Bristol, Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1199-8668
Jane M BlazebyNational Institute for Health Research Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-3354-3330
John MacleodNational Institute for Health Research Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Amanda Owen-SmithHealth Economics Bristol, Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Helen ParrettiNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom.
Richard WelbournDepartment of Upper GI and Bariatric Surgery, Somerset NHS Foundation Trust, Taunton, United Kingdom.
Maria Theresa RedanielThe National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration West (NIHR ARC West), University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0668-0874
Andy JudgeMusculoskeletal Research Unit, Translational Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3015-0432

Funding

Department of Health BRC-1215-20011Department of Health NIHR200181
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdults living with overweight/obesity are eligible for publicly funded weight management (WM) programmes according to national guidance. People with the most severe and complex obesity are eligible for bariatric surgery. Primary care plays a key role in identifying overweight/obesity and referring to WM interventions. This study aimed to (1) describe the primary care population in England who (a) are referred for WM interventions and (b) undergo bariatric surgery and (2) determine the patient and GP practice characteristics associated with both. METHODS AND

findingsAn observational cohort study was undertaken using routinely collected primary care data in England from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink linked with Hospital Episode Statistics. During the study period (January 2007 to June 2020), 1,811,587 adults met the inclusion criteria of a recording of overweight/obesity in primary care, of which 54.62% were female and 20.10% aged 45 to 54. Only 56,783 (3.13%) were referred to WM, and 3,701 (1.09% of those with severe and complex obesity) underwent bariatric surgery. Multivariable Poisson regression examined the associations of demographic, clinical, and regional characteristics on the likelihood of WM referral and bariatric surgery. Higher body mass index (BMI) and practice region had the strongest associations with both outcomes. People with BMI ≥40 kg/m2 were more than 6 times as likely to be referred for WM (10.05% of individuals) than BMI 25.0 to 29.9 kg/m2 (1.34%) (rate ratio (RR) 6.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) [5.99,6.40], p < 0.001). They were more than 5 times as likely to undergo bariatric surgery (3.98%) than BMI 35.0 to 40.0 kg/m2 with a comorbidity (0.53%) (RR 5.52, 95% CI [5.07,6.02], p < 0.001). Patients from practices in the West Midlands were the most likely to have a WM referral (5.40%) (RR 2.17, 95% CI [2.10,2.24], p < 0.001, compared with the North West, 2.89%), and practices from the East of England least likely (1.04%) (RR 0.43, 95% CI [0.41,0.46], p < 0.001, compared with North West). Patients from practices in London were the most likely to undergo bariatric surgery (2.15%), and practices in the North West the least likely (0.68%) (RR 3.29, 95% CI [2.88,3.76], p < 0.001, London compared with North West). Longer duration since diagnosis with severe and complex obesity (e.g., 1.67% of individuals diagnosed in 2007 versus 0.34% in 2015, RR 0.20, 95% CI [0.12,0.32], p < 0.001), and increasing comorbidities (e.g., 2.26% of individuals with 6+ comorbidities versus 1.39% with none (RR 8.79, 95% CI [7.16,10.79], p < 0.001) were also strongly associated with bariatric surgery. The main limitation is the reliance on overweight/obesity being recorded within primary care records to identify the study population.

conclusionsBetween 2007 and 2020, a very small percentage of the primary care population eligible for WM referral or bariatric surgery according to national guidance received either. Higher BMI and GP practice region had the strongest associations with both. Regional inequalities may reflect differences in commissioning and provision of WM services across the country. Multi-stakeholder qualitative research is ongoing to understand the barriers to accessing WM services and potential solutions. Together with population-wide prevention strategies, improved access to WM interventions is needed to reduce obesity levels.

Indexed as

Bariatric SurgeryOverweightAdultCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleObesitySecondary Health Care

Identifiers

PMID37769031
PMCPMC10538857

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.