Evidence mapPaperPMID 42359773Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2026

Views and experiences of weight management for people living with mobility‑limiting conditions, intellectual disabilities or severe mental illness: a qualitative evidence synthesis.

Katy Sutcliffe, Dylan Kneale, Velichka Dimitrova, Silvy Mathew, Claire Stansfield, Karen Schucan Bird, Carol Rivas, Rachael Hunter, Alison O'Mara-Eves

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors.

Katy SutcliffeEPPI Centre, UCL Social Research Institute, University College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5469-8649
Dylan KnealeEPPI Centre, UCL Social Research Institute, University College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7016-978X
Velichka DimitrovaEPPI Centre, UCL Social Research Institute, University College London, London, UK.
Silvy MathewEPPI Centre, UCL Social Research Institute, University College London, London, UK.
Claire StansfieldEPPI Centre, UCL Social Research Institute, University College London, London, UK.
Karen Schucan BirdEPPI Centre, UCL Social Research Institute, University College London, London, UK.
Carol RivasEPPI Centre, UCL Social Research Institute, University College London, London, UK.
Rachael HunterHealth Economics Analysis and Research methods Team (HEART), University College London, London, UK.
Alison O'Mara-EvesEPPI Centre, UCL Social Research Institute, University College London, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (qualitative). The objectives are as follows: This qualitative evidence synthesis (QES) aims to address the question: What is known from qualitative evidence about behavioural weight management for people living with mobility-limiting conditions, intellectual disabilities, or severe mental illness? The five review objectives are as follows. To explore individuals' experiences with weight and behavioural weight-management programmes. This includes understanding how individuals living with mobility-limiting conditions, intellectual disabilities, severe mental illness and their carers experience managing their weight and how they perceive and engage with behavioural weight-management programmes, including how accessible, supportive, and relevant they find the programme elements. To identify barriers to and facilitators of managing a healthy weight and accessing behavioural weight-management programmes. Focusing on the unique obstacles encountered by each population group, we will examine issues such as physical accessibility, communication challenges, financial constraints, and gaps in tailored support that may prevent equitable participation. We will also include people's perspectives on structural and system-level barriers, as well as the influence of intersectional factors (e.g. gender and ethnicity), on the challenges of maintaining weight and accessing and benefiting from support. To understand the impact of stigma and discrimination on programme engagement and outcomes. This objective seeks to uncover how stigma related to weight, disability, or mental health influences individuals' willingness to participate, their inclusion and sense of belonging with others within the programmes, and overall programme satisfaction. It also examines the role of stigma as a potential barrier to success. To capture the perspectives of programme providers and healthcare practitioners. Gathering insights from healthcare providers and programme facilitators, this objective assesses which programme elements are considered successful and which present ongoing challenges. This includes evaluating aspects like accessibility, engagement strategies, and support mechanisms that may require improvement. To produce an inclusive piece of research through incorporating the insight of people with lived experience and professional expertise in interpreting and considering the implications of the evidence. By synthesising this qualitative evidence, the review aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of how to design and implement behavioural weight-management programmes that are more inclusive, effective, and responsive to the needs of these populations.

Indexed as

Intellectual DisabilityMental DisordersMobility LimitationPersons with DisabilitiesWeight Reduction ProgramsHumansQualitative ResearchSocial Stigma

Identifiers

PMID42359773
PMCPMC13307068

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.