| Title |
Pharmacotherapy for Weight Management in the VHA
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of General Internal Medicine, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11606-016-3949-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Todd P. Semla, Chris Ruser, Chester B. Good, Susan Z. Yanovski, Donna Ames, Laurel A. Copeland, Charles Billington, U. Inge Ferguson, Louis J. Aronne, Thomas A. Wadden, W. Timothy Garvey, Caroline M. Apovian, David Atkins |
| Abstract |
Weight management medications (WMM) are underutilized as an adjunct to behavioral and lifestyle interventions. In fiscal years 2014-2015, a total of approximately 2500 veterans-a mere 2% of veterans receiving care from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA)-eligible for a WMM received a prescription for one. A State of the Art Conference on Weight Management workgroup, focused on pharmacotherapy, developed evidence-based recommendations and strategies to foster the appropriate use of WMM in the VHA. The workgroup identified patient, prescriber, and health system barriers to and facilitators for prescribing WMM. Barriers included patient and provider concerns about medication safety and efficacy, limited involvement of primary care, restrictive medication criteria for use (CFU), and skepticism among providers regarding the safety and efficacy of WMM and the perception of obesity as a disease. Potential facilitators for removing barriers included patient and provider education about WMM and the health benefits of weight loss, increased engagement of primary care providers in weight management, relaxation of the CFU, and creation of a system to help patients navigate through weight management treatment options. Several research questions were framed with regard to WMM in general, and specifically to the care of obese veterans. While some of the workgroup's conclusions reflect issues specific to the VHA, many are likely to be applicable to other health organizations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 54 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 17% |
| Researcher | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Unknown | 16 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 28% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 13% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 9% |
| Psychology | 3 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 20 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 March 2017.
All research outputs
#18,756,367
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#6,408
of 7,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#226,202
of 310,848 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#69
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,806 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.8. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 310,848 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.