| Title |
Rapid Evidence Review of Bariatric Surgery in Super Obesity (BMI ≥ 50 kg/m2)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of General Internal Medicine, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11606-016-3950-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kim Peterson, Johanna Anderson, Erin Boundy, Lauren Ferguson, Katherine Erickson |
| Abstract |
Despite accumulating evidence of the important health benefits of bariatric surgery in morbidly obese patients in general, bariatric surgery outcomes are less clear in higher-risk, high-priority populations of patients with BMI ≥ 50 kg/m(2). To help the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Health Services Research & Development Service (HSR&D) develop a research agenda, we conducted a rapid evidence review to better understand bariatric surgery outcomes in adults with BMI ≥ 50 kg/m(2). We searched MEDLINE(®), the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov through June 2016. We included trials and observational studies. We used pre-specified criteria to select studies, abstract data, and rate internal validity and strength of the evidence (PROSPERO registration number CRD42015025348). All decisions were completed by one reviewer and checked by another. Among 1892 citations, we included 23 studies in this rapid review. Compared with usual care, one large retrospective VA study provided limited evidence that bariatric surgery can lead to increased mortality in the first year, but decreased mortality long-term among super obese veterans. Studies that compared different bariatric surgical approaches suggested some differences in weight loss and complications. Laparoscopic gastric bypass generally resulted in greater short-term proportion of excess weight loss than did other procedures. Duodenal switch led to greater long-term weight loss than did gastric bypass, but with more complications. The published literature that separates the super obese is insufficient for determining the precise balance of benefits and harms of bariatric surgery in this high-risk subgroup. Future studies should evaluate a more complete set of key outcomes with longer follow-up in larger samples of more broadly representative adults. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 63 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 11% |
| Researcher | 4 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 15 | 24% |
| Unknown | 21 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 11% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 7 | 11% |
| Unknown | 22 | 35% |
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 08 March 2017.
All research outputs
#21,420,714
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#7,217
of 7,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#272,735
of 310,848 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#79
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.