ArticleObesity science & practice2024
Assessment of clinician agreement with and knowledge of evidence-based obesity treatment in the primary care setting.
Article in Obesity science & practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Primary care patient and practice member perspectives on weight loss medications: challenges and opportunities.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Assessment of clinician agreement with and knowledge of evidence-based obesity treatment in the primary care setting.Obesity science & practice · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Effective, evidence-based obesity treatment is needed, which often involves use of anti-obesity medications (AOMs). Data on the breadth and quality of guideline-directed obesity treatment implementation in primary care remain limited. This study aimed to assess primary care clinicians' agreement with and knowledge of guideline-directed obesity treatment, as well as to assess the health status of persons with obesity and their use of AOMs. Methods: This multimethod study included a prospective survey of primary care clinicians, utilizing a questionnaire that measured agreement on a 5-point Likert scale and knowledge via multiple choice questions. A retrospective analysis was also performed of patient data collected between 30 June 2016 and 30 June 2020 from primary care clinics in the Midwest. Results: Data were analyzed from 27 clinician survey responders, finding agreement toward all measured areas, however less strong for chronic AOM use and resource allocation. The survey identified multiple gaps in knowledge. Researchers assessed 5656 baseline encounters and 2941 corresponding follow-up encounters. Analysis revealed ≥50% of the total patients experienced persistently uncontrolled obesity (mean body mass index of ≥40 kg/m Conclusions: Clinicians agree with guideline-directed obesity treatment. Persons with obesity who are poorly controlled identify an opportunity for patient care improvement.
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.