Clinical Scorecard: The Increasing Role of Asian Research in Obesity Surgery: A 40-Year Bibliometric Review
At a Glance
Category
Detail
Condition
Obesity and related comorbidities
Key Mechanisms
Bariatric metabolic surgery (BMS) facilitates sustainable weight loss and manages obesity-related comorbidities
Target Population
Obese adults in Asian countries including China, Thailand, Korea, and Singapore
Care Setting
Surgical and research settings focusing on obesity management
Key Highlights
Obesity prevalence is rising significantly in Asia, with China reporting a 16.4% adult obesity rate linked to premature mortality.
Bariatric metabolic surgery, introduced in 1954, is an effective intervention for sustainable weight loss and comorbidity management.
Bibliometric analysis reveals increasing Asian contributions to BMS research, with China playing a pivotal role.
Guideline-Based Recommendations
Diagnosis
Identify obesity and related metabolic disorders as indications for bariatric metabolic surgery.
Management
Utilize bariatric metabolic surgery techniques such as sleeve gastrectomy, gastric band, and roux-en-y gastric bypass for effective obesity treatment.
Monitoring & Follow-up
Track research trends and publication outputs to assess evolving surgical techniques and outcomes.
Risks
Consider potential premature mortality associated with obesity if untreated.
Patient & Prescribing Data
Asian adults with obesity and obesity-related comorbidities
Bariatric metabolic surgery is increasingly adopted in Asia, showing efficacy in weight loss and comorbidity management, with research output correlating with economic and population factors.
Clinical Best Practices
Employ bibliometric tools to monitor and guide research focus and collaboration in obesity surgery.
Adapt surgical techniques based on evolving evidence and regional research contributions.
Focus on multidisciplinary approaches integrating surgical intervention with public health strategies to address obesity.
A four-factor staging system stratified response rates from 90.9% to 37.5% in a retrospective cohort study, although the model showed only moderate discrimination (C statistic, 0.68) and requires external validation