ArticleObesity pillars2026
Real-world experiences with obesity medication in the Netherlands: A mixed methods study among patients and professionals.
Article in Obesity pillars, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Insight into how obesity medication (OM) is prescribed, accessed, and experienced in daily practice remains limited. This study explored prescribing practices, patient experiences and perceived barriers and facilitators regarding OM use in the Netherlands. Methods: This was an exploratory sequential mixed-methods study consisting of qualitative interviews followed by a cross-sectional questionnaire survey. Semi-structured interviews were performed with healthcare professionals and individuals using or considering OM (n = 14). Findings informed the development of a questionnaire completed by healthcare professionals (n = 102) and individuals using OM (n = 96). Results: The qualitative analysis generated five themes: (1) navigating access and reimbursement pathways, (2) negotiating professional roles and expertise, (3) balancing medication and lifestyle support, (4) living with OM: relief, stigma and legitimacy, and (5) uncertainty and future perspectives. Quantitative findings largely supported these themes. Overall, OM care was experienced as supportive and accessible. However, important challenges were identified, including: strict reimbursement criteria, a mandatory combined lifestyle intervention perceived as insufficiently tailored to individual needs, high out-of-pocket costs, uncertainty regarding tapering strategies, and differences between regular and private care pathways. Conclusion: OM is generally experienced positively within Dutch obesity care, but structural barriers remain. Improving access, reimbursement policies, professional education, and guidance regarding long-term treatment and tapering may contribute to more equitable and sustainable obesity care.
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.