Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24398335›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2014

How accurate is web-based self-reported height, weight, and body mass index in young adults?

Kirrilly Pursey, Tracy L Burrows, Peter Stanwell, Clare E Collins

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 110 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
110citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

110 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Dietary E-Health Interventions for Adults With Severe Mental Illness: A Systematic Review.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Article

50 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Kirrilly PurseyFaculty of Health and Medicine, Priority Research Centre for Physical Activity and Nutrition, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia.
Tracy L Burrows
Peter Stanwell
Clare E Collins

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWeb-based approaches are an effective and convenient medium to deliver eHealth interventions. However, few studies have attempted to evaluate the accuracy of online self-reported weight, and only one has assessed the accuracy of online self-reported height and body mass index (BMI).

objectiveThis study aimed to validate online self-reported height, weight, and calculated BMI against objectively measured data in young Australian adults.

methodsParticipants aged 18-35 years were recruited via advertisements on social media sites and reported their current height and weight as part of an online survey. They then subsequently had the same measures objectively assessed by a trained researcher.

resultsSelf-reported height was significantly overestimated by a mean of 1.36 cm (SD 1.93; P<.001), while self-reported weight was significantly underestimated by -0.55 kg (SD 2.03; P<.001). Calculated BMI was also underestimated by -0.56 kg/m(2) (SD 0.08; P<.001). The discrepancy in reporting resulted in the misclassification of the BMI category of three participants. Measured and self-reported data were strongly positively correlated (height: r=.98, weight: r=.99, BMI: r=.99; P<.001). When accuracy was evaluated by BMI category and gender, weight remained significantly underreported by females (P=.002) and overweight/obese participants (P=.02).

conclusionsThere was moderate to high agreement between self-reported and measured anthropometric data. Findings suggest that online self-reported height and weight can be a valid method of collecting anthropometric data.

Indexed as

Body HeightBody Mass IndexBody WeightInternetSelf ReportAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansMaleNew South WalesYoung Adultbody mass indexheightInternetself-reportweight

Identifiers

PMID24398335
PMCPMC3906650

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.