Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 312

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Psychosocial Evaluation of Bariatric Surgery Candidates: A Survey of Present Practices

Bauchowitz, Andrea U., Gonder-Frederick, Linda A., Olbrisch, Mary-Ellen, Azarbad, Leila, Ryee, Mi-Young, Woodson, Monique, Miller, Anna, Schirmer, Bruce·2005·Psychosomatic Medicine

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Successful outcome for bariatric surgery is largely dependent on patients' ability to adhere to postoperative behavior changes. A thorough psychological evaluation is often required before patients' approval for surgery. In addition to a standard psychiatric interview, assessment of behavioral components specific to this surgery seems indicated. No uniform guidelines exist on how to conduct such an evaluation. This survey was designed to collect information on the level of involvement of mental health professionals with bariatric surgery programs and their approach to evaluating bariatric surgery candidates. METHODS: Surveys about psychological evaluation practices were mailed to 188 bariatric surgery programs. Eighty-one surveys were returned. RESULTS: Eighty-eight percent of programs require patients to undergo a psychological evaluation and almost half require formal standardized psychological assessment. Current illicit drug use, active symptoms of schizophrenia, severe mental retardation, and lack of knowledge about the surgery were the most commonly cited contraindications, preventing patients from gaining approval for surgery. DISCUSSION: The majority of programs use psychological evaluations; however, the exclusion criteria for surgery vary greatly. Establishing uniform guidelines for the screening of bariatric surgery candidates is necessary. Suggestions on how to begin this process are provided. More research about behavioral and cognitive predictors of postsurgical success is needed.

Overview

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 · 10.1097/01.psy.0000174173.32271.01

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Bauchowitz, A. U., Gonder-Frederick, L. A., Olbrisch, M.-E., Azarbad, L., Ryee, M.-Y., Woodson, M., Miller, A., & Schirmer, B.
Venue
Psychosomatic Medicine
Published
2005-09
Volume
67
Issue
5
Pages
825-832
ISSN
0033-3174 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1986026272
Cited by
312
References
3
FWCI
13.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.