ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
Food security and its impact on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients seeking evaluation for metabolic and bariatric surgery.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFood insecurity (FI) places patients seeking metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) evaluation at a disadvantage, as it is associated with worse patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). However, of the further granularity impact of FI levels on PROMs is needed. We sought to investigate the impact of food insecurity levels on BODY-Q ER (eating-related) behavior, distress, symptoms, and physical function in preoperative MBS patients.
methodsPatients who underwent preoperative assessment for MBS (Feb 2024-2025) and completed the validated 6-item FI questionnaire and BODY-Q ER modules (scale of 0-100; 0 being worse health and 100 being optimal health) were included. Patients were divided into food security levels (high, low, and very low). Median Rasch scores (0-100, higher signifies better health) of BODY-Q ER behavior, distress, symptoms, and physical function were compared between food security levels using the Kruskal-Wallis test (p < 0.05).
resultsFrom the 614 patients, 76% had high food security, 14.7% had low food security, and 9.9% had very low food security. Median Rasch scores from all four BODY-Q surveys (eating-related behavior, eating-related distress, eating-related symptoms, and physical function) were statistically different by food security level (p < 0.001). Higher median Rasch scores were seen in patients with high food security in all BODY-Q surveys compared to low food security and very low food security.
conclusionsFood security levels directly correlate with BODY-Q PROMs scores: lower food security is associated with worse eating-related behavior, distress, symptoms, and physical function. The 6-item FI questionnaire helped identify individuals at highest risk. Presurgical planning should involve goal-directed interventions to optimize these patients and correlate with surgical outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40938367What 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.