ArticleObesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity2025
Valuing behavioral interventions for obesity reduction: A scoping review of economic models.
Article in Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity, 2025. 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.
- Valuing behavioral interventions for obesity reduction: A scoping review of economic models.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Policymakers require health economic modeling to guide their decision-making over the choice of interventions for obesity. This scoping review was undertaken to report on the health economic models in use for estimating the value of behavioral interventions (individual or population level) for obesity reduction. Electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, EconLit, and Web of Science) were searched for publications meeting inclusion criteria from January 2015 to May 2023. Seventy-three studies were included, using 44 health economic models between them. When considered against the expert recommendations for modeling of this type, only four models (9%) met all five key elements. The element most commonly unfulfilled was the use of a microsimulation modeling approach (41%, n = 18), followed by model validation (46%, n = 20). A majority of models met each of the other elements: use of a lifetime horizon (59%, n = 26), inclusion of key health events (66%, n = 29), and a risk equation approach to event simulation (71%, n = 31). In addition, under half of the studies considered health inequalities in their reporting. Continued proliferation of models with inadequate time horizons, breadth of obesity-related health conditions, and perspectives on costs and outcomes risks underestimation of the benefits of longer term interventions and impacts on health inequalities.
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.