Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21602953›Full record

ArticleOpen medicine : a peer-reviewed, independent, open-access journal2008

Validity of self-reported height and weight for measuring prevalence of obesity.

Noori Akhtar-Danesh, Mahshid Dehghan, Anwar T Merchant, James A Rainey

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Open medicine : a peer-reviewed, independent, open-access journal, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Noori Akhtar-Danesh
Mahshid Dehghan
Anwar T Merchant
James A Rainey

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo examine the validity of self-reported body mass index (BMI) in estimating the prevalence of obesity in the Canadian population, and to suggest a model for predicting actual BMI from self-reported data.

methodsThis analysis is based on 1131 participants with both self-reported and measured height and weight from the Canadian Community Health Survey, Cycle 2.2 dataset. We estimated the prevalence of obesity as well as the mean and standard deviation (SD) of BMI according to sex, age group, and measured weight classification. Multiple regression analysis was used to build a model to assess the relation between actual BMI and variables of age, sex, and self-reported BMI.

resultsThe overall prevalence of obesity was 23.0% based on measured BMI, and 15.6% based on self-reported BMI. Estimated mean (SD) for self-reported and measured BMI were 25.8 (4.8) and 26.9 (5.0) kg/m(2), respectively. Only 74.3% of obese men and 56.2% of obese women were correctly classified as obese on the basis of self-reported measures. Females and heavier respondents showed more BMI under-reporting than others.

conclusionsTo estimate overweight and obesity in etiological and disease relationship studies, the use of measured height and weight in BMI estimation is preferable to the use of self-reported values. However, if self-reported height and weight are used in population studies, our proposed model can be used to reliably predict the actual BMI with a narrow 95% confidence interval.

Identifiers

PMID21602953
PMCPMC3091607

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.