Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27648293›Full record

ArticleBMC obesity2016

Accuracy of BMI correction using multiple reports in children.

Madhumita Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, Ann C Haas, Nancy Nicosia, Ashlesha Datar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC obesity, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. School Food and Beverage Availability and Children's Diet, Purchasing, and Obesity: Evidence From a Natural Experiment.The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine · 2020
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. The Effect of State Competitive Food and Beverage Regulations on Childhood Overweight and Obesity.The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine · 2017
    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.

Madhumita Bonnie Ghosh-DastidarRAND Corporation, Department of Economics and Statistics, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401 USA.
Ann C HaasRAND Corporation, Department of Economics and Statistics, 4570 Fifth Ave, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA.
Nancy NicosiaRAND Corporation, Department of Economics and Statistics, Boston, MA USA.
Ashlesha DatarRAND Corporation, Department of Economics and Statistics, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401 USA ; Dornsife Center for Economic and Social Research (CESR), University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA USA.

Funding

Environments Impact on Childrens Diet, Activity & Obesity: A Natural ExperimentR01HD067536 · NICHD · RAND CORPORATION · PI DATAR, ASHLESHA · 2011 to 2015
$3.2M
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD067536
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundErrors in reported height and weight raise concerns about body mass index (BMI) and obesity estimates obtained from self or proxy reports. Researchers have corrected BMI using linear statistical models, primarily with adult samples. We compared the accuracy of BMI correction in children for models that included child or parent reports versus both reports, and models that separately predicted height and weight compared to a single model for BMI.

methodsHeight and weight from child reports, parent reports, and objective measurements for 475 children participating in the Military Teenagers' Environment, Exercise and Nutrition Study were analyzed. Two approaches were evaluated: (1) separate linear correction models for height and weight versus (2) a single linear correction model for BMI. Each approach considered models for height, weight, or BMI with child reports, parent reports, or both reports, respectively, as predictors, stratified by gender. Prediction accuracy was computed using leave-one-out validation. Models were compared using root mean squared error for BMI, and sensitivity and specificity for overweight and obesity indicators.

resultsModels that included both reports provided the best fit relative to a model using either set of reports, with adjusted R(2) of height, weight, and BMI models ranging from 67.1 to 87.6 % in males, and 69.2 to 88.3 % in females. Estimates of BMI from separate models for height and weight had the least prediction error, relative to those derived from a single model for BMI or from uncorrected (child or parent) reports. Cross-validated Root Mean Squared Error (RMSEs) preferred a model that included only parent reports among males and females, compared to models with only child reports or both reports. When assessing sensitivity (true positive) for obesity and overweight/obesity, the results varied by gender and outcomes. Specificity (true negative) was similarly high for all models.

conclusionObjective measurements are more accurate than self- or proxy-reports of BMI. In situations where objective measurement is infeasible, an approach that combines collecting a validation sub-sample including multiple reports of children's height and weight, with estimation of BMI correction models maybe a cost-effective and practical solution. Correction models generate BMI estimates that are closer to objective measurements than reports.

Indexed as

BMIChildrenHeightLinear correctionMeasurement errorObesityWeight

Identifiers

PMID27648293
PMCPMC5020432

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.