ArticleObesity surgery2025
Priority Index for Bariatric Surgery Based on a New Classification of Severity in Obesity.
Article in Obesity surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to propose and evaluate a severity rating in obesity (SERO) based on a new priority index for bariatric surgery (PIBS). We compared the waiting time for surgery (WTS) in a simulated list of 200 patients diagnosed, classified, and hypothetically submitted to bariatric surgery using two prioritization criteria: date of inclusion in the list and PIBS. Our simulations show that patients spent an average of 350.44 days waiting for surgery while in the first case, when PIBS was adopted as the prioritization criterion, the WTS varied according to the severity of each patient's condition so more severe cases waited an average of 82.56 days, i.e., up to 75.55% less time considering statistical significance in the differences (p < 0.05). Therefore, the proposed prioritization model proved effective, fair, and reproducible and can be used to manage waiting lists for bariatric surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39918721What 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.