Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27145829›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2016

Reliability and criterion validity of self-measured waist, hip, and neck circumferences.

Pamela Barrios, Jennifer Martin-Biggers, Virginia Quick, Carol Byrd-Bredbenner

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Toddler diet quality: a factor associated with childhood growth?International journal of obesity (2005) · 2026
    Article
  4. Adding home-use BIA scales, online food diaries, and tape-measures to large-scale questionnaire studies: Insights from the population-based PROFILES registry research.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Effectiveness of school-based intervention in obese children.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Pamela BarriosDepartment of Nutritional Sciences, Rutgers University, 26 Nichol Avenue, New Brunswick, NJ, 08901, USA.
Jennifer Martin-BiggersDepartment of Nutritional Sciences, Rutgers University, 26 Nichol Avenue, New Brunswick, NJ, 08901, USA.
Virginia QuickDepartment of Nutritional Sciences, Rutgers University, 26 Nichol Avenue, New Brunswick, NJ, 08901, USA. gingermquick@gmail.com.
Carol Byrd-BredbennerDepartment of Nutritional Sciences, Rutgers University, 26 Nichol Avenue, New Brunswick, NJ, 08901, USA.
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWaist, hip, and neck circumference measurements are cost-effective, non-invasive, useful markers for body fat distribution and disease risk. For epidemiology and intervention studies, including body circumference measurements in self-report surveys could be informative. However, few studies have assessed the test-retest reliability and criterion validity of a self-report tool feasible for use in large scale studies.

methodsAt home, mothers of young children viewed a brief, online instructional video on how to measure their waist, hip, and neck circumferences. Afterwards, they created a homemade paper measuring tape from a downloaded file with scissors and tape, took all measurements in duplicate, and entered them into an online survey. A few weeks later, participants visited an anthropometrics lab where they measured themselves again, and trained technicians (n = 9) measured participants in duplicate using standard equipment and procedures. To assess differences between self- and technician-measured circumferences, duplicate measurements for participant home self-measurements, participant lab self-measurements, and technician measurements each were averaged and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests conducted. Agreement between all possible pairs of measurements were examined using Intraclass Correlations (ICCs) and Bland-Altman plots.

resultsParticipants (n = 41; aged 38.05 ± 3.54SD years; 71 % white) were all mothers that had at least one child under the age of 12 yrs. Technical error of measurements for self- and technician- duplicate measurements varied little (0.08 to 0.76 inches) and had very high reliability (≥0.90). Intraclass Correlations (ICC) comparing self vs technician were high (0.97, 0.96, and 0.84 for waist, hip, and neck). Comparison of self-measurements at home vs lab revealed high test-retest reliability (ICC ≥ 0.87). Differences between participant self- and technician measurements were small (i.e., mean difference ranged from -0.13 to 0.06 inches) with nearly all (≥93 %) differences within Bland-Altman limits of agreement and <10 % exceeding the a priori clinically meaningful difference criterion.

conclusionsThis study has demonstrated a simple, inexpensive method for teaching novice mothers of young children to take their own body circumferences resulting in accurate, reliable data. Thus, collecting self-measured and self-reported circumference data in future studies may be a feasible approach in research protocols that has potential to expand our knowledge of body composition beyond that provided by self-reported body mass indexes.

Indexed as

AdultBody Fat DistributionDiagnostic ErrorsDiagnostic Self EvaluationFemaleHumansOverweightReproducibility of ResultsWaist CircumferenceBody circumferencesCriterion validityHipMeasurementsNeckReliabilityWaist

Identifiers

PMID27145829
PMCPMC4855335
OpenAlexW2345363190

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.