Cited by 15Pharmacology and Obesity TreatmentObesity and Health PracticesBariatric Surgery and Outcomes

Factors that determine patients considering medication for the disease of obesity: an IMI2 SOPHIA study

Open access
Craig, H. C., Alsaeed, D., Heneghan, H., Al-Najim, W., Al Ozairi, E., le Roux, C. W.·2025·International Journal of Obesity

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Objective: Obesity-related problems can now be managed with effective nutritional therapy, pharmacotherapy, and surgeries that achieve >10% weight loss. Assessing patient preferences, treatment choices, and factors affecting patients can improve treatment compliance and efficacy. Our aim was to identify factors affecting patient preference and subsequent choice of pharmacotherapy among those seeking treatment for obesity-related disorders. Methods: A participatory action study using purposeful sampling recruited 33 patients with obesity complications. They were referred to specialist clinics in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and chronic kidney disease. Sixteen males and seventeen females aged 18–70 years, with BMI > 35 kg/m 2 were recruited. Before the interview, participants watched a 60-minute video explaining nutritional therapy, pharmacotherapy, and surgery in equipoise. Data were collected in semi-structured interviews; Reflective thematic analysis was used. This sub study focuses only on patients who expressed specific attitudes (positive or negative) towards pharmacotherapy. Results: Ten (30%) patients expressed a view on pharmacotherapy. Eight (24%) patients chose pharmacotherapy alone, whereas two (6%) patients chose pharmacotherapy combined with nutritional therapy. In this sub study focusing on pharmacotherapy, five themes were identified related to choosing whether or not to take medication: (1) attitudes towards pharmacotherapy, (2) attitudes toward size of obesity and its complications, (3) weighing the benefits and risks of treatment, (4) knowledge and reassurance of health professionals, and (5) costs associated with drug therapy. Conclusion: The primary concerns regarding pharmacotherapy for intentional weight loss were efficacy, side effects, lifelong dosing, pharmacokinetics, and cost. Providing access to information about all the pharmacotherapies and the benefits is likely to result in greater penetrance of treatment.

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 · 10.1038/s41366-024-01524-4

Cites

21 of 21 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?

  • Literature suggests that aligning with patients' preferences of attributes in treatment modalities increases the likelihood of patients persisting on therapy.

    “Literature suggests that aligning with patients’ preferences of attributes in treatment modalities increases the likelihood of patients persisting on therapy10,11.”

    From Orforglipron for maintenance of body weight reduction: the double-blind, randomized phase 3b ATTAIN-MAINTAIN trial (2026) · cites this paper as [11]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) reports that treatment attributes and patients’ preferences influence treatment choices, and it discusses beliefs that affect medication adherence. It does not establish that matching treatment attributes to preferences increases the likelihood of patients persisting on therapy. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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: 1

  1. [14]Mühlbacher AC, Kaczynski A. Patient preferences in treatment of diabetes mellitus: a systematic review of stated preference surveys. ISPOR. 2014;17:PA356. 27200707

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Craig, H. C., Alsaeed, D., Heneghan, H., Al-Najim, W., Al Ozairi, E., & le Roux, C. W.
Affiliations
  • University College Dublin (IE)
  • Dasman Diabetes Institute (KW)
Corresponding author
Craig, H. C.
Venue
International Journal of Obesity
Published
2024-05-01
Volume
49
Issue
3
Pages
397-401
ISSN
  • 0307-0565 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-5497
OpenAlex
W4396547540
Cited by
15
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 2
FWCI
4.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Obesity (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Repository UCD (University College Dublin) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations
  • Irish Research eLibrary
  • European Commission (HORIZON2020, 875534)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Pharmacology and Obesity Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Obesity and Health Practices
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Bariatric Surgery and Outcomes
Keywords
obesity, obesity pharmacotherapy, patient preferences, medication adherence, weight loss, nutritional therapy, bariatric surgery, treatment decision-making, attitudes toward medication, treatment costs
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Obesity, Weight Loss, Anti-Obesity Agents, Young Adult, Patient Preference

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