ArticleObesity surgery2025
Exploratory Machine Learning Methods to Assess a Novel Individualized Lifestyle Intervention on Weight and Body Composition with or Without a Swallowable Intragastric Balloon.
Article in Obesity surgery, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesThis study assesses the effects of an individualized lifestyle intervention (LI) on body composition (BC), both with and without the addition of the Allurion™ swallowable intragastric balloon (SIGB).
methodsIn this case-controlled study, a total of 1,143 patients with a BMI ≥ 30 kg/m
resultsThe groups were age-matched but differed in sex and BMI. At 16 weeks, the LI + SIGB group demonstrated significantly higher mean %TBWL (16.11 ± 5.06 vs. 10.22 ± 6.09, p < 0.001), %FML (27.64 ± 9.78 vs. 15.34 ± 10.37, p < 0.001), and %VFL (17.60 ± 7.33 vs. 13.80 ± 8.57, p < 0.001). While %MML was also higher in the LI + SIGB group (6.57 ± 7.64 vs. 3.55 ± 12.45, p < 0.001), the rate of %FML was more than double the rate of %MML in both groups, suggesting favorable body composition changes. A significantly greater proportion of patients in the LI + SIGB group achieved key weight loss thresholds of > 5%, > 10%, and > 20% TBWL at 16 weeks (all p < 0.001).
conclusionsThe SIGB significantly enhanced total body weight loss, fat loss, and visceral fat loss when used as an adjunct to an intensive lifestyle intervention. While the SIGB did lead to greater muscle mass loss, the overall body composition changes were favorable, with fat loss far outpacing muscle loss in both intervention groups. These findings suggest that the SIGB is a safe and effective tool to accelerate early weight loss, particularly fat loss, when combined with a robust lifestyle protocol.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41238971What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.