Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28698663›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology2017

Medical devices for the treatment of obesity.

Phong Ching Lee, John Dixon

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Endoscopic bariatrics: current therapies and future directions.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2022
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Obesity: Pathophysiology and Management.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2018
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Phong Ching LeeObesity and Metabolism Unit, Department of Endocrinology, Singapore General Hospital, 20 College Road, Singapore 169856.
John DixonClinical Obesity Research, Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute, 75 Commercial Road, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia.
Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute · AUSingapore General Hospital · SG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Obesity is a major public health concern that leads to numerous metabolic, mechanical and psychological complications. Although lifestyle interventions are the cornerstone of obesity management, subsequent physiological neurohormonal adaptations limit weight loss, strongly favour weight regain and counteract sustained weight loss. A range of effective therapies are therefore needed to manage this chronic relapsing disease. Bariatric surgery delivers substantial, durable weight loss but limited access to care, perceived high risks and costs restrict uptake. Medical devices are uniquely positioned to bridge the gap between more conservative lifestyle intervention and weight-loss pharmacotherapy and more disruptive bariatric surgery. In this Review, we examine the range of gastrointestinal medical devices that are available in clinical practice to treat obesity, as well as those that are in advanced stages of development. We focus on the mechanisms of action as well as the efficacy and safety profiles of these devices. Many of these devices are placed endoscopically, which provides gastroenterologists with exciting opportunities for treatment.

Indexed as

Bariatric SurgeryHumansObesityRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID28698663
OpenAlexW2734549491

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.