ArticlePloS one2014
Comparisons of measured and self-reported anthropometric variables and blood pressure in a sample of Hong Kong female nurses.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Accuracy of self-reported height, weight, and waist circumference in poor, rural areas of China.PeerJ · 2024Article
- Self-reported and measured anthropometric variables in association with cardiometabolic markers: A Danish cohort study.PloS one · 2023Article
- Recruiting participants for ergonomic research using self-reported stature and body mass.Work (Reading, Mass.) · 2023Article
- Article
- Association between parental unhealthy behaviors and offspring's cardiovascular health status: Results from a cross-sectional analysis of parent-offspring pairs in China.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2022Article
- Differences in accuracy of height, weight, and body mass index between self-reported and measured using the 2018 Korea Community Health Survey data.Epidemiology and health · 2022Article
- Parent-child resemblance in BMI and obesity status and its correlates in China.Public health nutrition · 2021Article
- Use and reporting of Bland-Altman analyses in studies of self-reported versus measured weight and height.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2020Article
- Accuracy of Self-Reported Height, Weight, and BMI Over Time in Emerging Adults.American journal of preventive medicine · 2019Article
- Examining validity of body mass index calculated using height and weight data from the US driver license.BMC public health · 2019Article
- Accuracy of self-reported height, weight and waist circumference in a Japanese sample.Obesity science & practice · 2017Article
- Reliability and criterion validity of self-measured waist, hip, and neck circumferences.BMC medical research methodology · 2016Article
- Changes in Body Weight From Young Adulthood to Middle Age and Its Association With Blood Pressure and Hypertension: A Cross-Sectional Study in Hong Kong Chinese Women.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2016Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the validity of self-reported weight, height, body mass index (BMI), waist circumference and blood pressure compared with standardized clinical measurements and to determine the classification accuracy in overweight/obesity and central adiposity.
methodsThis pilot study was integrated into a life-course study entitled "Hong Kong Women's Health Study" among 1,253 female nurses in Hong Kong who were aged 35 years to 65 years. Data were collected from self-administered questionnaires that were mailed to the respondents. Of these participants, we obtained the standard body measurements of 144 (11.5%) at our research center. We then compared the self-reported anthropometric variables and blood pressure with the measured data to assess validity based on the level of misreporting, percentage of agreement, consistency, sensitivity and specificity.
resultsThe self-reported and measured values were highly correlated in terms of anthropometry and blood pressure (correlation coefficients ranged from 0.72 to 0.96). Height was overestimated at an average of 0.42 cm, and waist circumference was underestimated at 2.33 cm (both P<0.05), while no significant differences were observed from weight, blood pressure and BMI (all P>0.05). The proportions of overweight, obesity, and central adiposity by self-reported data did not vary greatly from the measured data (all P>0.05). The self-reporting resulted in correct classifications of BMI, waist circumference, and systolic blood pressure in 85%, 78%, and 87% of women, with corresponding Kappa index values of 0.79, 0.55, and 0.82, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity were 84.6% and 95.7%, respectively, with respect to overweight/obesity detection, whereas those for central adiposity detection were 70.6% and 83.8%, respectively.
conclusionIn a sample of female Hong Kong nurses, the self-reported measures of height, weight, BMI, waist circumference and blood pressure were generally valid. Furthermore, the classification accuracies of overweight/obesity and central adiposity were acceptable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.