Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22208614›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2011

Validation of obesity based on self-reported data in Spanish women participants in breast cancer screening programmes.

Beatriz Isidoro, Virginia Lope, Carmen Pedraz-Pingarrón, Francisca Collado-García, Carmen Santamariña, Pilar Moreo, Carmen Vidal, María Soledad Laso, Milagros García-Lopez, Marina Pollán

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Determinants of newly diagnosed comorbidities among breast cancer survivors.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2014
    Article
  5. 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

10 authors.

Beatriz IsidoroCancer and Environmental Epidemiology Unit, National Centre for Epidemiology, Carlos III Institute of Health, Madrid, Spain.
Virginia Lope
Carmen Pedraz-Pingarrón
Francisca Collado-García
Carmen Santamariña
Pilar Moreo
Carmen Vidal
María Soledad Laso
Milagros García-Lopez
Marina Pollán

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMeasurement of obesity using self-reported anthropometric data usually involves underestimation of weight and/or overestimation of height. The dual aim of this study was, first, to ascertain and assess the validity of new cut-off points, for both overweight and obesity, using self-reported Body Mass Index furnished by women participants in breast cancer screening programmes, and second, to estimate and validate a predictive model that allows recalculate individual BMI based on self-reported data.

methodsThe study covered 2927 women enrolled at 7 breast cancer screening centres. At each centre, women were randomly selected in 2 samples, in a ratio of 2:1. The larger sample (n = 1951) was used to compare the values of measured and self-reported weight and height, to ascertain new overweight and obesity cut-off points with self-reported data, using ROC curves, and to estimate a predictive model of real BMI using a regression model. The second sample (n = 976) was used to validate the proposed cut-off points and the predictive model.

resultsWhereas reported prevalence of obesity was 19.8%, measured prevalence was 28.2%. The sensitivity and specificity of this classification would be maximised if the new cut-off points were 24.30 kg/m2 for overweight and 28.39 kg/m2 for obesity. The probability of classifying women correctly in their real weight categories on the basis of these points was 82.5% in the validation sample. Sensitivity and specificity for determining obesity using the new cut-off point in the validation sample were 90.0% and 92.3% respectively. The predictive model for real BMI included the self-reported BMI, age and educational level (university studies vs lower levels of education). This model succeeded in correctly classifying 90.5% of women according to BMI categories, but its performance was similar to that obtained with the new cut-off points.

conclusionsQuantification of self-reported obesity entails a considerable underestimation of this problem, thereby questioning its validity. The new cut-off points established in this study and the predictive equation both allow for more accurate estimation of these prevalences.

Indexed as

Mass ScreeningAgedBody Mass IndexBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMiddle AgedObesityPrevalenceROC CurveSelf ReportSpain

Identifiers

PMID22208614
PMCPMC3268784

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.