ArticleObesity pillars2026
A survey of primary care physicians' views on supporting patients who lose insurance coverage for Glucagon-Like Peptide-1-based drugs for weight management.
Article in Obesity pillars, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1)-based drugs for weight management are commonly prescribed by primary care physicians (PCPs), many of whom have limited familiarity with alternative weight management treatments. This knowledge gap may be especially problematic when patients lose insurance coverage for - and therefore access to - GLP-1-based drugs after initial weight loss, as these patients may require alternative treatments to sustain weight loss or maintenance. To date, little is known about how prepared PCPs feel to manage this increasingly common clinical scenario. Methods: This was a cross-sectional web-based survey of PCPs at an academic medical center in the Midwestern United States who provide care to patients who lost coverage for GLP-1-based drugs for weight management from a large statewide insurer in 2025. Quantitative responses were analyzed descriptively and with chi-square tests; open-ended responses were analyzed with directed content analysis. Results: Among surveyed PCPs, the response rate was 51% (111/216). Approximately half (53/109, 49%) felt uncomfortable helping patients manage their weight following loss of coverage for GLP-1-based drugs for weight management. Greater comfort was associated with past experiences prescribing phentermine (aOR 4.14, 95% CI 1.69-10.18) and prescribing liraglutide (aOR 2.34, 95% CI 1.05-5.24). Most (82/110, 75%) felt that less than a quarter of their patients would be able to maintain their weight loss after losing insurance coverage and access to GLP-1-based drugs. Referral to American Board of Obesity Medicine (ABOM) board-certified physicians was preferred to support ongoing weight management of these patients (46/96, 48%). Conclusions: Half of all PCPs at an academic medical center are uncomfortable supporting patients' transition from GLP-1-based drugs to alternative weight management treatments following loss of insurance for these agents. Additional resources, including access to ABOM-certified physicians, are needed to support patients facing this common clinical scenario.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.