ArticleObesity science & practice2026
Patient-Reported Continuity of GLP-1 Receptor Agonist Therapy.
Article in Obesity science & practice, 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
Objective: Use of GLP-1 receptor agonists is associated with significant weight loss in many individuals. Discontinuation is associated with weight regain. Patients' experience with this is not well characterized. This study describes the patient experience of continuity of care. Methods: A cross-sectional electronic survey was administered to adults identified from an academic medical center's electronic health records as having at least one GLP-1 RA prescription in the preceding 6 years and a subsequent prescription gap of greater than 90 days. The 87-item instrument spanned six domains: care settings, comorbidity and treatment context, continuity, discontinuity, dietitian/lifestyle support, and digital-feature preferences. Primary outcomes were item-level frequencies. Exploratory composites included a 7-item Continuity-of-Care Index (CCI) and a 5-item Discontinuity Index (DIS), each rescaled 0-100; subgroup comparisons used Kruskal-Wallis, Mann-Whitney, and chi-square tests, with multiple-imputation sensitivity analyses. Results: Of 4890 invitations, 261 adults completed the survey (5.3%); 143 (54.8%) reported current use of a prescription weight-management medication and 159 (60.9%) reported prior-authorization requirements. Among them, 79 (49.7%) either waited more than 7 days or were never approved. Continuity strengths included knowing whom to contact about medications (76.2%) and timely team responses (70.7%); the weakest items were cross-clinic coordination (54.1%) and visibility into required next steps (52.2%). The CCI (mean 69.5 [SD 22.7]; Conclusions: Patients described obesity-care disruptions primarily as process failures, including prior authorization delay, out-of-pocket cost, pharmacy stock-outs and dispensing delays, and fragmented cross-clinic coordination. They prioritized transparent, workflow-oriented navigation.
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.