Cited by 151Bariatric Surgery and OutcomesObesity, Physical Activity, DietBody Contouring and Surgery

Psychological predictors of weight loss after bariatric surgery: A review of the recent research

Wimmelmann, Cathrine L., Dela, Flemming, Mortensen, Erik L.·2014·Obesity Research & Clinical Practice

Abstract

Background Morbid obesity is the fastest growing BMI group in the U.S. and the prevalence of morbid obesity worldwide has never been higher. Bariatric surgery is the most effective treatment for severe forms of obesity especially with regard to a sustained long-term weight loss. Psychological factors are thought to play an important role for maintaining the surgical weight loss. However, results from prior research examining preoperative psychological predictors of weight loss outcome are inconsistent. The aim of this article was to review more recent literature on psychological predictors of surgical weight loss.Methods We searched PubMed, PsycInfo and Web of Science, for original prospective studies with a sample size >30 and at least one year follow-up, using a combination of search terms such as 'bariatric surgery', 'morbid obesity', 'psychological predictors', and 'weight loss'. Only studies published after 2003 were included.Results 19 eligible studies were identified. Psychological predictors of surgical weight loss investigated in the reviewed studies include cognitive function, personality, psychiatric disorder, and eating behaviour.Conclusion In general, recent research remains inconsistent, but the findings suggest that pre-surgical cognitive function, personality, mental health, composite psychological variables and binge eating may predict post-surgical weight loss to the extent that these factors influence post-operative eating behaviour.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.orcp.2013.09.003

Cites

103 of 103 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wimmelmann, C. L., Dela, F., & Mortensen, E. L.
Affiliations
University of Copenhagen (DK)
Corresponding author
Wimmelmann, Cathrine L.
Venue
Obesity Research & Clinical Practice
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-07
Volume
8
Issue
4
Pages
e299-e313
ISSN
1871-403X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2133059200
Cited by
151
References
103
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 4
FWCI
1.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Obesity Research & Clinical Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Bariatric Surgery and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Body Contouring and Surgery
Keywords
bariatric surgery, morbid obesity, weight loss, psychological predictors, cognitive function, personality, mental illness, eating behaviour, binge eating, preoperative psychological assessment, long-term weight maintenance
MeSH terms
Cognition, Demography, Feeding Behavior, Humans, Obesity, Morbid, Personality Disorders, Predictive Value of Tests, United States, Weight Loss, Body Mass Index, Prevalence, Treatment Outcome, Bariatric Surgery, Binge-Eating Disorder

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review