Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32282816›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Validation of self-reported height and weight in a large, nationwide cohort of U.S. adults.

James M Hodge, Roma Shah, Marjorie L McCullough, Susan M Gapstur, Alpa V Patel

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 155 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
155citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

155 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Periconceptional biomarkers for maternal obesity: a systematic review.Reviews in endocrine & metabolic disorders · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Optimal nap timing and body mass index: beyond duration.Journal of translational medicine · 2026
    Observational
  19. Article
  20. Article

95 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

5 authors.

James M HodgeBehavioral and Epidemiology Research Group, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA.ORCID 0000-0002-6253-7394
Roma ShahBehavioral and Epidemiology Research Group, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA.
Marjorie L McCulloughBehavioral and Epidemiology Research Group, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA.
Susan M GapsturBehavioral and Epidemiology Research Group, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA.
Alpa V PatelBehavioral and Epidemiology Research Group, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHeight and weight are commonly used metrics in epidemiologic studies to calculate body mass index. Large cohort studies generally assess height and weight by self-report rather than by measurement. The aim of this study was to assess the validity of self-reported height and weight in the Cancer Prevention Study-3 (CPS-3), a large, nationwide cohort recruited by the American Cancer Society between 2006-2013.

methodsIn a subset of CPS-3 participants (n = 2,643), weight and height were assessed at the same time via self-report and in-person measurement. BMI was calculated and classified underweight (<18.5 kg/m2), normal (18.5-<25 kg/m2), overweight (25-<30 kg/m2), or obese (≥30 kg/m2). Self-reported and measured height, weight, and BMI were compared using mean differences and Bland-Altman plots and examined by sex, race/ethnicity, education, marital status, age group, and BMI category.

resultsMen and women slightly overreported height and underreported weight. BMI calculated from self-reported data was lower than for measured data for men and women. In analyses stratified by race/ethnicity, age, education, and marital status, older women and women with less than a college degree overreported height. Approximately 13% of men and 7% of women were misclassified into a lower self-reported BMI category, with misclassification of BMI being greatest in obese men and women.

conclusionsOverall, height, weight, and BMI were well-reported, and this study further suggests that BMI computed from self-reported weight and height is a valid measure in men and women across different socio-demographic groups.

Indexed as

Body HeightBody Mass IndexBody WeightAdultAgedCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSelf ReportUnited States

Identifiers

PMID32282816
PMCPMC7153869

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.