ArticleNutrients2026
Effectiveness of a Bariatric-Specific Multivitamin Versus Conventional Targeted Supplementation for Preoperative Micronutrient Deficiency Correction in Bariatric Surgery Candidates: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Nutrients, 2026. 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
backgroundMicronutrient deficiencies (MD) are highly prevalent among candidates for bariatric surgery (BS) and are associated with adverse perioperative and postoperative outcomes. Although guidelines recommend systematic preoperative screening and correction, conventional targeted supplementation (CTS) often requires multiple products, potentially limiting adherence and delaying surgical readiness. Bariatric-specific multivitamins (BSM) may simplify nutritional management, but their real-world effectiveness for preoperative correction of multiple MD remains insufficiently investigated.
objectiveTo compare the effectiveness, efficiency, and adherence of a BSM versus CTS for preoperative correction of multiple MD in BS candidates.
methodsThis retrospective multicenter cohort study included 1560 adults with obesity evaluated for BS between 2020 and 2024 across three Italian bariatric centers. The primary efficacy analysis was restricted to patients presenting with ≥3 laboratory-confirmed MD at baseline. Patients treated between 2020 and 2022 received individualized CTS using multiple products, whereas those treated between 2023 and 2024 received a single BSM. Biochemical follow-up was scheduled at 4 and 8 weeks. The primary outcome was the achievement of complete biochemical correction of all baseline deficiencies at the predefined 4-week follow-up assessment (composite endpoint). Secondary outcomes included supplementation burden and self-reported adherence. Early correction rates were compared using absolute risk differences and risk ratios; adjusted associations were evaluated using multivariable regression models including center and baseline deficiency burden. As a supplementary analysis, the patient-level proportion of baseline deficiencies corrected at 4 weeks was also evaluated.
resultsAmong patients with ≥3 baseline deficiencies (
conclusionsIn a real-world multicenter cohort of BS candidates with ≥3 baseline MD, a simplified preoperative supplementation strategy based on a BSM was associated with a significantly higher probability of complete biochemical correction at 4 weeks, lower supplementation burden, and higher reported adherence compared with CTS. Although complete correction was not universal at 4 weeks, BSM significantly increased the likelihood of achieving early multi-deficiency normalization. Given the non-concurrent observational design, these findings should be interpreted as hypothesis-generating and warrant confirmation in prospective studies with concurrent cohorts.
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.