A lack of consistency in reporting on obesity across the UK has created a postcode lottery for patient care, according to a new study.
Researchers from the University of Glasgow looked at NHS weight management programmes and found a wide variation in inclusion criteria, referral routes, delivery format and programme length and cost.
The programmes are evaluated and report on results in different ways, meaning direct comparisons cannot be made between different services.
A panel of experts brought together by the researchers hope their suggestions on reporting programme successes will help reduce what they say is the "postcode lottery" of obesity care for patients.
Lead author of the study Dr Jennifer Logue said: "We know that many obesity and weight management programmes are highly effective for patients, however, understanding what initiatives work best are key to prolonged funding and best patient care.
"By having the information on how each programme works we can start to better understand what works best for patients.
"This will lead to improved outcomes for all services, potential cost savings and a move towards less variation in what is delivered.
"The lack of consistent and comparable information has led to those who commission and pay for these services showing reluctance to fund more programmes as there is little evidence of what works best and what does not."
Dr Logue, now at Lancaster University, added: "By applying a consistent pattern of evaluation to all obesity and overweight programmes, hopefully we will be able to prove just how effective many of these initiatives can be."
The study - Core Outcome Set for Behavioural Weight Management Interventions for Adults with Overweight and Obesity: STAndardised Reporting of Lifestyle Weight Management InTerventions to Aid Evaluation (STAR-LITE) - is published in Obesity Reviews.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here