Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25294689›Full record

ArticleScandinavian journal of public health2014

Age-related differences in recommended anthropometric cut-off point validity to identify cardiovascular risk factors in ostensibly healthy women.

Sreevidya Subramoney, Cecilia Björkelund, Xinxin Guo, Ingmar Skoog, Ingvar Bosaeus, Lauren Lissner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scandinavian journal of public health, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

6 authors.

Sreevidya SubramoneyNordic School of Public Health, Gothenburg, Sweden Department of Public Health and Community Medicine; Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Sweden subramoneys@gmail.com.
Cecilia BjörkelundDepartment of Public Health and Community Medicine/Primary Health Care.
Xinxin GuoInstitute of Neurology and Physiology.
Ingmar SkoogInstitute of Neurology and Physiology.
Ingvar BosaeusDepartment of Clinical Nutrition and Dietetics.
Lauren LissnerDepartment of Public Health and Community Medicine; Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo investigate validity of widely recommended anthropometric and total fat percentage cut-off points in screening for cardiovascular risk factors in women of different ages.

methodsA population-based sample of 1002 Swedish women aged 38, 50, 75 (younger, middle-aged and elderly, respectively) underwent anthropometry, health examinations and blood tests. Total fat was estimated (bioimpedance) in 670 women. Sensitivity, specificity of body mass index (BMI; ≥25 and ≥30), waist circumference (WC; ≥80 cm and ≥88 cm) and total fat percentage (TF; ≥35%) cut-off points for cardiovascular risk factors (dyslipidaemias, hypertension and hyperglycaemia) were calculated for each age. Cut-off points yielding high sensitivity together with modest specificity were considered valid. Women reporting hospital admission for cardiovascular disease were excluded.

resultsThe sensitivity of WC ≥80 cm for one or more risk factors was ~60% in younger and middle-aged women, and 80% in elderly women. The specificity of WC ≥80 cm for one or more risk factors was 69%, 57% and 40% at the three ages (p < .05 for age trends). WC ≥80 cm yielded ~80% sensitivity for two or more risk factors across all ages. However, specificity decreased with increasing age (p < .0001), being 33% in elderly. WC ≥88 cm provided better specificity in elderly women. BMI and TF % cut-off points were not better than WC.

conclusionsValidity of recommended anthropometric cut-off points in screening asymptomatic women varies with age. In younger and middle-age, WC ≥80 cm yielded high sensitivity and modest specificity for two or more risk factors, however, sensitivity for one or more risk factor was less than optimal. WC ≥88 cm showed better validity than WC ≥80 cm in elderly. Our results support age-specific screening cut-off points for women.

Indexed as

AnthropometryAdultAgedAge FactorsBody CompositionBody Mass IndexCardiovascular DiseasesDyslipidemiasFemaleHumansHyperglycemiaHypertensionMass ScreeningMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsRisk FactorsAnthropometric cut-off pointscardiovascular risk factorsdyslipidaemiahypertensionpublic healthscreeningsensitivityspecificitytotal fat %waist circumference

Identifiers

PMID25294689
PMCPMC4257998

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.