Cited by 43Bariatric Surgery and OutcomesObesity and Health PracticesObesity, Physical Activity, Diet

Identifying mechanisms that predict weight trajectory after bariatric surgery: rationale and design of the biobehavioral trial

Open access
Heinberg, Leslie J., Bond, Dale S., Carroll, Ian, Crosby, Ross, Fodor, Anthony, Fouladi, Farnaz, Gunstad, John, Mitchell, James +2 more·2020·Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases

Abstract

Bariatric surgery is currently the most efficacious and durable intervention for severe obesity. The most commonly performed procedures in the United States are the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and the sleeve gastrectomy, which involve significant anatomic and physiologic alterations that lead to changes in behavior and biology. Unfortunately, many patients experience suboptimal weight loss and/or substantial weight regain. Eating and physical activity/sedentary behaviors, mood, cognition, and the gut microbiome all change postoperatively and have an association with weight change. The longitudinal relationship between changes in the gut microbiome and postoperative weight trajectory has not been explored thoroughly, and the interactive associations among the gut microbiome and the other variables that impact weight have been similarly understudied. The following is a methods and design description for a prospective, 24-month longitudinal study of 144 bariatric surgery patients, at 2 sites, that aimed to identify predictors of weight loss trajectories over 24 months after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and the sleeve gastrectomy. Specifically, the study will examine the relationships between empirically supported behavioral and biological variables and their combined impact on postoperative weight trajectories. Novel data collection will include intensive measurement of problematic eating behaviors and diet and physical activity postoperatively, which may be altered in parallel with, or in response to, changes observed in the gut microbiota. Identifying postoperative predictors of weight loss and co-morbidity resolution should inform development of novel interventions that are tailored to individual patients' risk profiles to optimize and sustain more favorable weight trajectories.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.soard.2020.06.020

Cites

70 of 70 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [22]First MB, Spitzer RL, Gibbon M, Williams JB. Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV-TR Axis I Disorders, Research Version, Patient Edition. (SCID-I/P). Research Version ed. New York:: Biometrics Research, New York State Psychiatric Institue 11 2002.
  2. [51]Mplus Users’ Guide. Sixth Edition. [computer program]. Los Angeles, CA: Muthen & Muthen 1998-2011.

Authors
Heinberg, L. J., Bond, D. S., Carroll, I., Crosby, R., Fodor, A., Fouladi, F., Gunstad, J., Mitchell, J., Peat, C., & Steffen, K.
Affiliations
  • Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine (US)
  • Brown University (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • University of North Dakota (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Charlotte (US)
  • Kent State University (US)
Corresponding author
Heinberg, Leslie J.
Venue
Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-11
Volume
16
Issue
11
Pages
1816-1826
ISSN
1550-7289 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3036116971
Cited by
43
References
70
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1
FWCI
4.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion)
  • UNC Libraries
Funders
National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Bariatric Surgery and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Obesity and Health Practices
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Keywords
bariatric surgery, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass
MeSH terms
Body-Weight Trajectory, Gastrectomy, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Obesity, Morbid, Prospective Studies, Gastric Bypass, Bariatric Surgery

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