| Title |
A Review of Unmet Needs in Obesity Management
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Obesity Surgery, March 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11695-012-0634-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
N. Nguyen, J. K. Champion, J. Ponce, B. Quebbemann, E. Patterson, B. Pham, W. Raum, J. N. Buchwald, G. Segato, F. Favretti |
| Abstract |
The prevalence of obesity continues to escalate in the USA; however, there is no consensus regarding the optimal therapy for obesity. For the vast majority of severely obese patients, conventional medical therapies (i.e., diet, exercise, behavioral counseling) often fail over the long term. Existing pharmacotherapy adjunctive to behavioral therapy has limited effectiveness and an imperfect safety record. In contrast, bariatric surgery has a high degree of weight loss efficacy, yet only a small fraction of the qualifying obese population undergoes these procedures because of the associated perioperative risks and potential late complications. In addition, the role of bariatric surgery is unclear in certain patient populations, such as patients with lower body mass index (BMI, 30-35 kg/m(2)), the high-risk super-super obese patients (BMI > 60), the morbidly obese adolescent, and obese patients requiring weight reduction in preparation for other procedures, such as orthopedic, transplant, or vascular surgeries. In these circumstances, there is a need for an effective but less invasive treatment to bridge the gap between medical and surgical therapy. This review examines current treatment outcomes, identifies prominent areas of unmet clinical needs, and provides an overview of two minimally invasive "temporary procedures for weight loss" that may eventually address some of the unmet needs in obesity management. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 130 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 128 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 27 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 13% |
| Researcher | 13 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 7% |
| Other | 19 | 15% |
| Unknown | 28 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 47 | 36% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 6% |
| Psychology | 6 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 25 | 19% |
| Unknown | 35 | 27% |
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 26 March 2012.
All research outputs
#15,242,707
of 22,663,969 outputs
Outputs from Obesity Surgery
#2,058
of 3,358 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,426
of 160,668 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Obesity Surgery
#25
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,663,969 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,358 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 160,668 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.