OHID 'Office for Health Improvement and Disparities' data plus some of our POV/translations...

OHID says "In addition, some data has been submitted for services funded by the existing public health grant or where the funding stream is unknown. Therefore, the findings in this report are not restricted to services funded by the new grant (number 31/5440). This statistical commentary focuses on data from all funding sources. Table 1 in the published data shows the counts of participants by funding stream."

Our POV/translation - 31/5440 = £30.5m of spending that OHID buried in other funding statistics because the output/impact is so low to report on it's own.

OHID says "Of those enrolled on services, 72% were funded by the weight management services grant 2021 to 2022 (No. 31/5440). Twenty per cent of participants were funded by existing public health grant funding and 8% were of unknown funding"

Our response question - Thanks for clarifying, why can't the 31/5440 be reported on by itself?

OHID says "9,585 participants had attended at least 75% of the service and were considered to have completed their programme with a calculated completion rate of 38% [see footnote 1][see footnote 2]"

1. Completion rate cannot be calculated by dividing the number of completers by the number of enrolments, as those starting their service in the latest quarter will not have had time to complete their service yet.

2. To calculate the completion rate, the analysis includes participants who have had referral, enrolment and end of service data submitted. It also includes those participants for whom only referral and enrolment data has been submitted and should have finished their service by the end of quarter 4 but their end of service data has not been submitted. These participants without end of service data is considered to have not completed their service. 

Our calculation using the 72% new funding - 6902 people (reported so far) funded by £30.5m completed their service.

OHID says "43% of participants had lost weight by the end of their service, with 17% having lost at least 5% of their initial body weight (table 17) [see footnote 3]"

3. This analysis is restricted to those participants where both a weight measurement at enrolment and at least one other subsequent weight measurement during their service are available. Those participants where only one weight measurement at enrolment is available are excluded from this analysis as it is unknown whether these participants subsequently lost weight or not.

🛑Nutriri sincerely apologises for reporting that 220 people possibly lost 5% of their body weight for £30.5m and correct that figure (for now with these experimental figures deciphered as best we can) to 1174 losing 5% body weight for £30.5m spending.🛑

OHID says "Of the 43,755 (remember 72% from £30.5m funding) that enrolled on services in quarters 1 to 4, 24,800 have had adequate time to complete their programme and have their data submitted.

It is difficult to calculate the average weight loss amongst participants whilst data continues to be collected. For example, some of the 24,800 participants have only had one weight measurement at referral submitted and no subsequent weight measurements even though they should have completed their service by the end of quarter 4.

Therefore, this section provides two estimates of average weight loss (table 19). Firstly, those participants who only had one initial weight measurement submitted are included and it is assumed they had no weight change at all during their service. Secondly, these participants with only one measurement are excluded from the analysis. For both estimates, any participants who were pregnant during the programme are excluded.

The mean weight loss was 2.24kg (95% confidence intervals 2.33-2.16kg), when making an assumption that those participants without an end of intervention weight measurement had no weight change during their service.

When limiting this analysis to only those who have had both a weight measurement at enrolment and at least one other subsequent weight measurement during their service (16,165 participants), the mean weight loss was 3.44kg (95% confidence intervals 3.57-3.31kg).

Our POV/translation/'ask' - 🤯 we've spent many (unpaid) hours putting these numbers alongside what we already know...

• 'weight management' services are ineffective and the individual absorbs all the blame, shame and stigma from this

• 'weight management' service providers get little job satisfaction delivering services

• Nutriri has a solution and proven that working weight neutrally/inclusively improves engagement rates and delivers more sustainable health outcomes

• It wouldn't need 1 years spending of Tier 2 WMS (£30.5m) funding to sort this out and forever improve access to weight neutral health and wellbeing systems

• 5% should do it!

For your own curiosity (and maybe not sanity!) please go and decipher the 'over-complex reasoning' offered HERE that attempts to justify the (lack of) satisfactory impact of £30.5m spent on 'improving the health of higher weight people'.