ArticleObesity science & practice2024
Exploring patient perspectives on shared decision making about bariatric surgery in two healthcare systems.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- The New Obesity Treatment Landscape: Challenges and Opportunities to Promote Shared Decision-Making in People With Obesity and Type 2 Diabetes.Diabetes care · 2026Review
- Exploring patients' perceptions and anticipated concerns regarding bariatric surgery.BMC surgery · 2025Article
- Enhancing Shared Decision-Making in Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery: A Multi-System Implementation and Evaluation.Obesity science & practice · 2025Article
- Sleeve the Bypass or Bypass the Sleeve?Obesity surgery · 2025Article
- Exploring patient perspectives on shared decision making about bariatric surgery in two healthcare systems.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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To assess patient perspectives on the level of shared decision making (SDM) experienced related to bariatric surgery. Background: Severe obesity is common and has serious health implications. Yet, few eligible patients pursue bariatric surgery. Shared decision making could be a useful approach for considering treatment options. Methods: Patients were surveyed at Kaiser Permanente and UPMC clinics providing bariatric surgical services. Cross-sectional samples represent three time points: (a) Cohort 1 (C1): following referral; (b) Cohort 2 (C2): after initial bariatric practice appointment; (c) Cohort 3 (C3): following pre-operative visit. Patients completed the electronic survey instruments: CollaboRATE, SDM-Q-9, and National Quality Forum (NQF) SDM process measures. Results: The sample included 167 participants, half from each site. Cohort distribution was 35% C1, 33% C2, and 32% C3. Mean age was 43.8 years (SD 13.5), BMI was 48 kg/m Conclusions: Patients seeking bariatric care reported moderate or high levels of SDM. In general, SDM metrics were highest just before 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.