ArticleObesity (Silver Spring, Md.)2025
Health care resource utilization and health care costs among digital weight-loss intervention participants and nonparticipants.
Article in Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Healthcare Cost Impacts of Telehealth-Delivered Nutrition Therapy among US Adults with Type 2 Diabetes or Obesity: A Matched Difference-in-Differences Analysis.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in obesity management: clinical evidence, translational gaps, and implementation priorities-a structured narrative review.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Review
- Health care resource utilization and health care costs among digital weight-loss intervention participants and nonparticipants.Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.) · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study was to compare health care resource utilization (HRU), health care costs, and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonist use among working US adults who engaged in Noom Weight, a smartphone-based lifestyle intervention for weight management, to individuals offered Noom who did not enroll.
methodsInsurance claims data were used to conduct retrospective analyses of 723 Noom participants matched via propensity scores and compared to 723 non-Noom participants at 6 months post index.
resultsCompared to nonparticipants, Noom participants had significantly lower HRU, medical and pharmacy costs, and GLP-1 agonist use in the 6-month post-index period. On average, Noom participants had 3.2 fewer outpatient visits, 0.34 fewer emergency department visits, 0.25 fewer inpatient visits, and 0.012 fewer surgeries than non-Noom participants (all p values <0.001). Noom participants' health care costs were $831 lower than non-Noom participants. Relative to non-Noom users, Noom participants also had 42% fewer claims for GLP-1 agonists (p = 0.02).
conclusionsCompared to matched nonparticipants, Noom participation was associated with lower HRU, health care costs, and GLP-1 agonist use at 6 months post index. Results of this study support Noom as a cost-effective and HRU-lowering digital weight-management program for working adults in the United States.
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.