Guideline / position statementindependent cross-checkabstract only checked I-BAR-11 standard review
When is weight-loss surgery recommended?
2022 American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) and International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) Indications for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery.
Overview
Eisenberg D et al.. Obes Surg 2023 · PMID 36336720 · DOI 10.1007/s11695-022-06332-1
Surgical societies recommend it for BMI above 35 and consider it from BMI 30 with metabolic disease.
Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: moderate
Plain-language summary
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Indications
- How was the study done?
Society statement
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
n/a
- What was actually found?
BMI thresholds
- How large was the observed effect?
n/a
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Surgery is for defined indications
- What are the study's limitations?
Professional society
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Contradicts blanket rejection
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
International
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Individual decisions
Scientific in-depth review
1. Full reference
- Authors
- Eisenberg D et al.
- Journal
- Obes Surg
- Year
- 2023
- Identifier
- PMID 36336720 DOI 10.1007/s11695-022-06332-1
- Verification
- verified – PubMed efetch 2026-10-25
- Retracted
- no
- Corrections
Publisher correction (ErratumIn Obes Surg 2023;33(1):15-16)
- Extent checked
- abstract only
- Conflicts of interest and funding
not stated in abstract
2. Research question
Indications for metabolic and bariatric surgery
3. Study design and population
- Study design
- Guideline / position statement – Professional society indication statement
- Sample size
n/a
4. Methods and endpoints
5. Actual results
- Results
Recommends MBS for BMI >35 regardless of comorbidities; consider for BMI 30-34.9 with metabolic disease; lower thresholds in Asian populations; states long-term results consistently demonstrate safety and efficacy.
- Absolute risks
not reported
- Authors' conclusion
As in results.
6. Strengths
- International societies
7. Weaknesses
- Surgical societies (professional interest)
- Abstract only
8. Risk of bias
- Orienting tool
- none applicable
- Type of assessment
- simplified assessment (abstract only)
- Full formal assessment
- no
- Overall risk of bias
- not assessable
9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation
10. Relevance to the specific claim
Shows mainstream position for indicated surgery; contrast with blanket rejection.
11. Independent contrary findings
12. Transferability to Germany and Europe
International.
13. Overall methodological judgement
Mainstream indication framework.
| Multidimensional assessment | |
|---|---|
| Authenticity of the source | verified |
| Methodological quality | moderate |
| Risk of bias | not assessable |
| Precision of results | not applicable |
| Directness | direct |
| Reproducibility | unknown |
| Consistency with the overall evidence | consistent |
| Regional transferability | moderate |
| Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive) | not applicable |