ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Impact of beneficiary status on bariatric surgery outcomes in a military treatment facility.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRetirees and dependents represent demographically and clinically distinct beneficiary groups within the Military Health System (MHS). We assessed whether beneficiary status influences perioperative outcomes, healthcare utilization, and weight loss after bariatric surgery.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults undergoing sleeve gastrectomy or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass from 01/01/2022 to 12/31/2024 at a single military treatment facility. Outcomes were stratified by beneficiary status (retiree versus dependent). Propensity scores incorporating demographic, clinical, and procedural factors were used to construct overlap weights, yielding covariate balance comparable to randomized allocation. Overlap-weighted logistic and linear regression models assessed the independent association between beneficiary status and postoperative outcomes. Sex interaction terms evaluated effect modification. A female-only 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis served as a sensitivity analysis to address marked sex imbalance between groups.
resultsAmong 281 patients, 123 (43.8%) were retirees and 158 (56.2%) dependents. Retirees were older (median 50 versus 46 years, p = 0.003), predominantly male (52% versus 7%, p < 0.001), higher frequency Black (12.2% versus 5.1%, p = 0.052) and Hispanic (22.8% versus 11.4%, p = 0.017) and had higher comorbidity burden (median count 5.0 versus 4.0, p < 0.001). Revision/conversion procedures were less common in retirees; otherwise, operative indices were comparable. In unadjusted analyses, retirees had shorter hospital length of stay (LOS), fewer all-cause ED visits at 30 days, and fewer surgical ED visits through 12 months. However, in weighted regression, beneficiary status was not independently associated with LOS, ED visits, readmissions, or short-term percent total weight loss. No significant sex-beneficiary status interaction was observed. In the female-only matched cohort (N = 114; 57 pairs), outcomes again remained comparable.
conclusionsAfter covariate adjustment using overlap weighting and sex-restricted propensity matching, beneficiary status was not independently associated with LOS, postoperative healthcare utilization, or short-term weight loss. These findings suggest equitable bariatric outcomes across MHS beneficiary groups.
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.