Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22546777›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of obesity (2005)2013

Temporal changes in bias of body mass index scores based on self-reported height and weight.

M Stommel, N Osier

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of obesity (2005), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing 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

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Self-reported height and weight: timeliness and source of the participant information.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Telehealth and Nutrition Support During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics · 2020
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Self-Reported vs. Measured Height, Weight, and BMI in Young Adults.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Weight change in breast cancer survivors compared to cancer-free women: a prospective study in women at familial risk of breast cancer.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2015
    Article
  18. Productivity or discrimination? An economic analysis of excess-weight penalty in the Swedish labor market.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2015
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors.

M StommelCollege of Nursing, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA. stommel@msu.edu
N Osier

Funding

Targeting Research and Academic Training of Nurses in GenomicsT32NR009759 · NINR · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI CONLEY, YVETTE P · 2006 to 2025
$4.5M
NINR NIH HHS T32 NR009759
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo investigate temporal changes in the bias associated with self-reported (as opposed to measured) body mass index (BMI) and explore the relationship of such bias to changing social attitudes towards obesity.

methodsUsing data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey covering two time periods, 1988-1994 and 2005-2008, discrepancy scores between self-reported vs measured BMI were generated. Changes in the sensitivity of BMI categories based on self-reports were examined for six weight groups, both for the US adult population as a whole and major demographic groups. Linear regression models were used to examine temporal changes in average bias, as well as attitudes about weight within each weight category and by demographic group.

resultsBetween 2005-2008 and 1988-1994, the bias towards underestimation of a person's BMI based on interview responses has declined among obese individuals, a trend evident in virtually all demographic subgroups explored. Conversely, most demographic groups showed little change in the extent of bias among underweight and normal-weight individuals. Although the 2005-2008 survey respondents underestimated their measured BMI more than the 1988-1994 respondents, this shift can be entirely explained by the increased prevalence of obesity in more recent years. In fact, obese individuals in 2005-2008 were less likely to overreport their height and underreport their weight than their counterparts in the 1988-1994. Evidence from responses to questions about ideal weight and desire to lose weight point in the direction of a shift in social attitudes, which may make it easier to 'admit' to greater weight in surveys.

conclusionOver the past 20 years, the bias in self-reported height and weight has declined leading to more accurate BMI categorizations based on self-report. This change is likely to affect efforts to find correction factors to adjust BMI scores based on self-reported height and weight.

Indexed as

Body HeightBody Mass IndexBody WeightSelf ReportAdultAgedBiasFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNutrition SurveysObesityReproducibility of ResultsTime FactorsUnited States

Identifiers

PMID22546777
PMCPMC3595465

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.