Loading
Life sciences · Journal article
Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare · September 17, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Journal article.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Introduction Although telehealth interventions have produced weight-management outcomes comparable with in-person care in several settings, 12-month randomized evidence from public tertiary services in middle-income countries remains limited. This study compared remote and in-person consultations for obesity treatment in a Brazilian public tertiary-care center, focusing on continuity of care, weight loss, and exploratory metabolic outcomes. Methods This 12-month, matched-pair randomized, prospective, single-center, open-label pilot trial included 32 adults in a multidisciplinary weight-management program. Participants were allocated to telehealth video consultations or standard in-person care. The primary outcomes were appointment attendance and treatment adherence, defined a priori as the proportion of missed appointments that were rescheduled and subsequently attended. Secondary outcomes included percentage change in body weight, the proportion of participants achieving ≥5% weight loss, anthropometric measures, and metabolic parameters. Results The overall absence rate did not differ significantly between the telehealth and in-person groups (12.5% vs. 17.1%; p =.413). All 10 missed telehealth appointments were rescheduled and attended, compared with 8 of 14 missed in-person appointments (100% vs. 57.1%; p =.024). Mean 12-month percentage weight change was −4.8% ± 4.7% in the telehealth group and −5.5% ± 3.8% in the in-person group, and 56.3% and 62.5% of participants, respectively, achieved ≥5% weight loss. Both groups had significant within-group reductions in waist and hip circumferences. HbA1c decreased within the telehealth group (6.39% ± 1.08% to 5.98% ± 0.46%; p =.005), but no between-group difference in HbA1c change was demonstrated. Discussion In this pilot trial, telehealth produced weight and anthropometric outcomes similar to those observed with in-person care and were associated with a higher proportion of missed appointments being rescheduled. The HbA1c finding was exploratory and does not establish metabolic superiority. Larger multicenter trials are needed to confirm these findings and assess long-term effectiveness, implementation, and cost-effectiveness. Trial registration Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials (ReBEC), RBR-7wt6hzm; UTN U1111-1318-5411. Registered on 7 April 2025, retrospectively.