Cited by 348Obesity and Health PracticesPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcareMental Health Treatment and Access

Weight bias and health care utilization: A scoping review

Open access
Alberga, Angela S., Edache, Iyoma Y., Forhan, Mary, Russell-Mayhew, Shelly·2019·Primary Health Care Research & Development

Abstract

Aim: The purpose of this scoping review was to explore the evidence on how perceptions and/or experiences of weight bias in primary health care influence engagement with and utilization of health care services by individuals with obesity. Background: Prior studies have found discrepancies in the use of health care services by individuals living with obesity; a greater body mass index has been associated with decreased health care utilization, and weight bias has been identified as a major barrier to engagement with health services. Methods: PubMed was searched from January 2000 to July 2017. Four reviewers independently selected 21 studies examining perceptions of weight bias and its impact on engagement with primary health care services. Findings: A thematic analysis was conducted on the 21 studies that were included in this scoping review. The following 10 themes were identified: contemptuous, patronizing, and disrespectful treatment, lack of training, ambivalence, attribution of all health issues to excess weight, assumptions about weight gain, barriers to health care utilization, expectation of differential health care treatment, low trust and poor communication, avoidance or delay of health services, and ‘doctor shopping’. Overall, our scoping review reveals how perceptions and/or experiences of weight bias from primary care health professionals negatively influence patient engagement with primary health care services.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This scoping review of 21 studies found that perceptions and/or experiences of weight bias from primary care health professionals negatively influence patient engagement with primary health care. It identifies 10 themes, including disrespectful treatment, low trust, avoidance or delay of services, and “doctor shopping.”

Key findings

  • Across 21 included studies, thematic analysis identified 10 themes: contemptuous, patronizing, and disrespectful treatment; lack of training; ambivalence; attribution of all health issues to excess weight; assumptions about weight gain; barriers to health care utilization; expectation of differential health care treatment; low trust and poor communication; avoidance or delay of health services; and “doctor shopping.”
  • Quantitative findings included: 21% perceived weight-related judgment from their primary care provider and were less likely to trust them; 13% reported prior doctor shopping due to differential treatment; 17% changed primary care physicians due to perceived indifference or negative attitudes toward bariatric surgery; 19% would avoid a medical appointment and 21% would seek a new doctor if they felt stigmatized about weight.
  • Avoidance/delay findings included: 32% of women with obesity and 55% of women with severe obesity reported delaying or canceling appointments because they knew they would be weighed; 12.7% reported delaying or canceling a physician appointment due to weight concerns; 2.6% attended but refused to be weighed. In severe obesity, health care stigmatization was associated with a 1.5 kg/m² increase in BMI.
  • Four studies did not report decreased health care utilization: Bottone et al. found 29.6% of patients with obesity versus 23.4% of normal-weight patients visited their primary care provider three or more times in the past six months; Hilbert et al. found greater BMI predicted greater weight bias internalization and greater health care utilization.

Methods

  • Scoping review using Arksey and O’Malley’s methodology and PRISMA-ScR reporting; PubMed was searched from January 2000 to July 2017, limited to English and French.
  • Four independent reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and full texts; 720 unique articles plus 12 additional articles yielded 732 screened records, of which 21 studies met inclusion criteria.
  • Data were charted for study characteristics, patient population, and outcomes, then synthesized using thematic analysis.

Limitations

  • Stated: the review focused primarily on weight bias in primary care health professionals, so conclusions can only be made about primary care health professionals; three papers reported three different outcomes from the same sample, which may be viewed as a limitation; future research is needed in other health sectors and settings.
  • Stated/evident: scoping review methodology is not intended to assess study quality or provide quantitative synthesis; findings were inconsistent across studies; the evidence base was predominantly US-based (71.4%), quantitative (62%), female-only in 47.6% of studies, and only 38.1% included exclusively participants with obesity, with a noted lack of literature on men’s engagement.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1463423619000227

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 93 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingcitation

    Participants perceived weight-related advice from health professionals as patronizing when health professionals insinuated there was a simple solution to patients' excess weight.

    “Participants perceived that weight-related advice from health professionals was delivered in a patronizing manner when health professionals insinuated that there was a simple solution to patients’ excess weight (Merrill and Grassley, 2008).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Merrill and Grassley, 2008

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Findingcitation

    Four studies reported that participants with overweight and obesity experienced contemptuous, patronizing, and/or disrespectful treatment from health professionals.

    “Four studies (Amy et al., 2006; Merrill and Grassley, 2008; Russell and Carryer, 2013; Buxton and Snethen, 2013) reported that participants with overweight and obesity experienced contemptuous, patronizing, and/or disrespectful treatment from health professionals.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Amy et al., 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Merrill and Grassley, 2008

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Russell and Carryer, 2013

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Findingcitation

    Participants with overweight and obesity reported feeling treated less respectfully than individuals classified as having a normal BMI.

    “Participants with overweight and obesity reported feeling that they were being treated less respectfully than individuals classified as having a normal BMI (Amy et al., 2006).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Amy et al., 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Findingcitation

    Participants living with overweight and obesity perceived a lack of training among health professionals.

    “Participants living with overweight and obesity perceived a lack of training among health professionals (Amy et al., 2006; Forhan et al., 2013; Russell and Carryer, 2013).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Amy et al., 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Forhan et al., 2013

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Russell and Carryer, 2013

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Findingown data

    Only participants with obesity were included in 38.1% (n=8) of the studies.

    “Only participants with obesity were included in 38.1% (n = 8) of the studies.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 18
  • May combine two claims. 13
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    These studies did not explicitly mention the types of primary health care services that the health professionals performed.

    “These studies did not explicitly mention the types of primary health care services that the health professionals performed.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    The remaining 47.6% of studies included only female participants (n=10).

    “The remaining 47.6% included only female participants (n = 10).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Of 732 screened articles, 21 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review.

    “Of the 732 articles that we screened as potentially relevant, 21 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Surveys were the most commonly used measure in quantitative studies (n=13, 62%).

    “Surveys were the most commonly used measure in quantitative studies [n = 13 (62%)].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Other studies (n=12, 57%) compared different combinations of underweight, normal weight, overweight, and obese BMI classifications.

    “Other studies [n = 12 (57%)] compared different combinations of underweight, normal weight, overweight, and obese BMI classifications.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    An additional 12 articles were identified from other sources, resulting in a total of 732 articles.

    “An additional 12 articles were identified from other sources resulting in a total of 732 articles.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    The literature search resulted in 720 unique articles.

    “The literature search resulted in 720 unique articles.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The most commonly used qualitative method was interviews (n=7, 33%), including focus groups (n=1, 4.8%), telephone (n=1, 4.8%), face-to-face (n=4, 19%), or a combination of face-to-face and telephone (n=1, 4.8%).

    “The most commonly used qualitative method was interviews [n = 7 (33%)] including focus groups [n = 1 (4.8%)], telephone [n = 1 (4.8%)], face-to-face [n = 4 (19%)], or a combination of face-to-face and telephone [n = 1 (4.8%)].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Another 28.6% of studies did not exclusively examine one health sector (n=6).

    “Another 28.6% of studies did not exclusively examine one health sector (n = 6).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    One study did not measure participant BMI (4.8%).

    “One study did not measure participant BMI (4.8%).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    The majority of included studies used quantitative methods (n=13, 62%).

    “and used quantitative methods [n = 13 (62%)]”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    The majority of included studies were carried out in the United States (n=15, 71.4%).

    “The majority of studies included in this review were carried out in the United States [n = 15 (71.4%)]”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The thematic analysis identified 10 themes: contemptuous, patronizing, and disrespectful treatment, lack of training, ambivalence, attribution of all health issues to excess weight, assumptions about weight gain, barriers to health care utilization, expectation of differential health care treatment, low trust and poor communication, avoidance or delay of health services, and 'doctor shopping'.

    “The following 10 themes were identified: contemptuous, patronizing, and disrespectful treatment, lack of training, ambivalence, attribution of all health issues to excess weight, assumptions about weight gain, barriers to health care utilization, expectation of differential health care treatment, low trust and poor communication, avoidance or delay of health services, and ‘doctor shopping’.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    The majority of included studies had mixed samples of both female and male participants (n=11, 52.4%).

    “The majority of the studies included mixed samples of both female and male participants [n = 11 (52.4%)].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Patients felt that the emphasis health professionals put on their weight distracted from other health issues and resulted in feelings of not being listened to.

    “Patients felt that the emphasis health professionals put on their weight distracted from other health issues and resulted in feelings of not being listened to (Brown et al., 2006; Russell and Carryer, 2013).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Brown et al., 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Russell and Carryer, 2013

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    These types of assumptions were often inaccurate, but health professionals did not listen when patients made efforts to correct them.

    “These types of assumptions were often inaccurate, but health professionals did not listen when patients made efforts to correct them (Pryor, 2002; Merrill and Grassley, 2008; DeJoy et al., 2016).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Pryor, 2002

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Merrill and Grassley, 2008

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites DeJoy et al., 2016

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Although seven studies reported the association between weight bias and decreased health care utilization, four studies reported different findings.

    “Although seven studies reported the association between weight bias and decreased health care utilization, four studies reported different findings (Merrill and Grassley, 2008; Buxton and Snethen, 2013; Hilbert et al., 2014; Bottone et al., 2014).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Merrill and Grassley, 2008

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Buxton and Snethen, 2013

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Hilbert et al., 2014

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    A qualitative study of women with obesity in general practice reported that many participants denied being treated differently because of their weight and did not believe they received less care.

    “Contrary to these results, a qualitative study conducted with women with obesity in a general practice setting reported that many participants denied being treated differently because of their weight and did not believe that they received less care (Buxton and Snethen, 2013).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Buxton and Snethen, 2013

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    A greater BMI predicted greater weight bias internalization and greater health care utilization.

    “Hilbert et al. reported that a greater BMI predicted greater weight bias internalization and greater health care utilization (Hilbert et al., 2014).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Hilbert et al., 2014

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Stigmatizing attitudes from health professionals are perceived and received by individuals with obesity and may contribute to multiple barriers to health care utilization.

    “These stigmatizing attitudes are perceived and received by individuals with obesity and may contribute to the creation of multiple barriers to health care utilization”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Drury and Louis, 2002

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Over the past decade, the prevalence of weight bias increased in the United States by 66% and has been documented in employment, education, and health care settings.

    “Over the past decade, the prevalence of weight bias has increased in the United States by 66% and has been documented in employment, education, and health care settings”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Andreyeva et al., 2008

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Puhl and Heuer, 2009

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Four independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts using keywords and their synonyms.

    “Four independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts using the following keywords and their synonyms: weight bias, primary health care, and use of health care services.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    All reviewers verified the charted data for accuracy and completeness.

    “All reviewers verified the data for accuracy and completeness.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Weight bias was cited as the fourth most common form of discrimination among US adults.

    “Weight bias was cited as the fourth most common form of discrimination among US adults”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Puhl et al., 2008

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Discrepancies between reviewers were resolved by consensus.

    “Discrepancies were resolved by consensus between reviewers.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) was used to guide the reporting for this scoping review.

    “The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA- ScR) was used to guide the reporting for this scoping review”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Tricco et al., 2018

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Weight bias poses adverse mental and physical health consequences such as exercise avoidance, anxiety, low self-esteem, and depression.

    “Not only does weight bias pose adverse mental and physical health consequences such as exercise avoidance (Vartanian and Shaprow, 2008), anxiety (Hilbert et al., 2014), low self-esteem (Hilbert et al., 2014), and depression (Hilbert et al., 2014)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Vartanian and Shaprow, 2008

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Hilbert et al., 2014

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Weight bias negatively affects patients' engagement in primary health care through their perceived barriers to health care utilization, expectations of differential health care treatment, low trust and poor communication, avoidance or delay of health services, and 'doctor shopping'.

    “Second, it is clear that weight bias negatively affects patients’ engagement in primary health care through their perceived barriers to health care utilization, expectations of differential health care treatment, low trust and poor communication, avoidance or delay of health services, and ‘doctor shopping’.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Patients' self-reported perceptions of weight bias accurately reflect health professionals' actual weight bias.
    • Rests on an assumption: The association between weight bias and avoidance or delay of health care is causal.
28 of 28
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Patients' self-reported perceptions of weight bias accurately reflect health professionals' actual weight bias.

    “Patients with overweight and obesity who felt their primary care providers judged their weight were less likely to report high trust in these primary care practitioners (Gudzune et al., 2014a).”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The included studies are sufficiently methodologically sound and comparable to synthesize into themes and conclusions.

    “In this scoping review, we reviewed 21 published studies to examine the influence of weight bias on engagement in primary health care.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The association between weight bias and avoidance or delay of health care is causal.

    “The results of this review indicate that patients with overweight and obesity delay or avoid health care services as a result of health professionals’ weight bias.”
3 of 3

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.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Forhan participant counts do not add to the stated sample size

    Minor

    The reported male and female counts total 10, but the study's sample size is given as 11. The table does not account for the remaining participant.

    Reported 11 · recomputed 10

  • Drury and Louis BMI counts leave six participants unaccounted for

    Minor

    The four reported BMI-group counts total 210, whereas the stated sample size is 216.

    Reported 216 · recomputed 210

  • Hansson and Rasmussen BMI counts leave 160 participants unaccounted for

    Minor

    The three reported BMI-group counts total 2,628, not the stated sample size of 2,788.

    Reported 2788 · recomputed 2628

  • Underweight and normal-weight BMI definitions overlap

    Minor

    The table defines underweight as a BMI greater than 20 kg/m2, which includes the entire stated normal-weight range of 20-24.9 kg/m2. The two classifications therefore cannot be distinct as written.

4 of 4

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Alberga, A. S., Edache, I. Y., Forhan, M., & Russell-Mayhew, S.
Affiliations
  • Concordia University (CA)
  • University of Alberta (CA)
Corresponding author
Alberga, Angela S.
Venue
Primary Health Care Research & Development
Published
2019
Volume
20
Pages
e116-e116
ISSN
  • 1463-4236 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-1128
OpenAlex
W2963174560
Cited by
348
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 37 · 2025: 71 · 2024: 110 · 2023: 50 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 1
FWCI
3.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Primary Health Care Research & Development (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Libraries and Cultural Resources (University of Calgary) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Concordia University
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Obesity and Health Practices
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
weight bias, obesity, health care utilization, primary care, patient engagement, doctor shopping, patient trust, clinician attitudes, barriers to care, weight stigma
MeSH terms
Weight Prejudice, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Body Weight, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Obesity, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Primary Health Care, Body Mass Index, Qualitative Research

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-09.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-09.

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