2016
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2016.3010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Change in Pain and Physical Function Following Bariatric Surgery for Severe Obesity

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

3
103
1
3

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

3
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 137 publications
(110 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
3
103
1
3
Order By: Relevance
“…However, larger studies with higher number of patients are needed to further analyze these data. Nevertheless, we demonstrated that significant weight loss after RYGB improves daily physical activities and has a positive impact on accompanying comorbidities and existing cardiovascular risk factors [8, 9, 13, 16, 31, 44-46]. In addition to morbidity and premature mortality, obesity and physical inactivity are responsible for a large economic burden [47].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, larger studies with higher number of patients are needed to further analyze these data. Nevertheless, we demonstrated that significant weight loss after RYGB improves daily physical activities and has a positive impact on accompanying comorbidities and existing cardiovascular risk factors [8, 9, 13, 16, 31, 44-46]. In addition to morbidity and premature mortality, obesity and physical inactivity are responsible for a large economic burden [47].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…17 Sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the robustness of results with respect to the missing at random assumption (eAppendix 1, supplement). …”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Models used all available data, and controlled for baseline characteristics related to missing follow-up data (i.e., age, race [white vs. non-white], and rates of diabetes, hypertension, and ischemic heart disease). 32 …”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Simulation was used to adjust for multiple comparisons. 32,33 With a sample size of 183, there was 80% power to detect a difference of: 1) 5% between prevalence rates for uncommon eating behaviors (e.g. 6% baseline prevalence) and 14% for common eating behaviors (e.g.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%