Skip to content

Study · Not a test of the peptide alone · 2019

1 result

Incremental cost-effectiveness of evidence-based non-surgical weight loss strategies.

Finkelstein EA, Verghese NR

Clinical obesity24 Jan 2019Cited by 31 (Europe PMC)

Summary

The text of this summary is not shown here, because the article license does not allow reuse. Read it at the source (opens in a new tab)

Text rights: Publisher copyright. Results still quote short attributed sentences.

Results from this study1

No result from this study comes from a test of the peptide.

Studies that did not test the peptide alone1

In this study, Liraglutide was a lab tool or a carrier, part of a mix, or the subject of a lab method. These results are not evidence about taking Liraglutide.

  1. 01HumanNot a test of Liraglutide aloneSystematic reviewOther

    In people with excess weight, pooled weight loss medications (including Saxenda, liraglutide) would become cost-effective only if costs fell by as much as 91%; only Weight Watchers Meetings was cost-effective.

    In plain wordsFor people with excess weight, weight loss medicines as a group, liraglutide included, were not cost-effective at current prices.

    Outcome
    Not applicableCost-effectiveness of weight loss medications
    Study

    n: not reported in source

    Comparator
    Other weight loss interventions
    Outcome group
    Cost-effectiveness · Whole body

    Measurements

    Cost decrease needed
    91%
    medications

    Source sentences

    Summary
    Sensitivity analyses revealed that for the medications to become incrementally cost-effective, costs would have to decrease by as much as 91%.
    2 context sentences
    Summary · context
    At an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $30 071 per additional QALY gained, only Weight Watchers Meetings was cost-effective.
    Summary · context
    We identified interventions through a systematic review of randomized controlled trials that reported weight loss 12 months from baseline.

    In this study, Liraglutide was a lab tool or a carrier, part of a mix, or the subject of a lab method. This result is not evidence about taking Liraglutide.

AI wrote and checked these results. AI can make mistakes, so check important results against the source.

Version history

PepBank keeps every version of the data on this study. Status changes from Retraction Watch, Europe PMC and Crossref are listed with their source.

  1. Version 2Current

    12 Oct 2026, 12:10 UTC

    Study results updated

  2. Version 1

    9 Oct 2026, 03:05 UTC

    First added · source update from Europe PMC

Subjects

Terms as the source lists them.

PepBank is a research reference. Talk to a doctor before you use any peptide.