Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33092686›Full record

SynthesisPreventing chronic disease2020

Discriminatory Capacity of Anthropometric Indices for Cardiovascular Disease in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Mitra Darbandi, Yahya Pasdar, Shima Moradi, Hamid Jan Jan Mohamed, Behrooz Hamzeh, Yahya Salimi

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Preventing chronic disease, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  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

6 authors.

Mitra DarbandiResearch Center for Environmental Determinants of Health, Health Institute, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah, Iran.
Yahya PasdarResearch Center for Environmental Determinants of Health, Health Institute, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah, Iran.
Shima MoradiResearch Center for Environmental Determinants of Health, Health Institute, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah, Iran.
Hamid Jan Jan MohamedNutrition and Dietetics Programme, School of Health Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kelantan, Malaysia.
Behrooz HamzehResearch Center for Environmental Determinants of Health, Health Institute, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah, Iran.
Yahya SalimiResearch Center for Environmental Determinants of Health, Health Institute, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionObesity is one of the main risk factors for cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cardiometabolic disease (CMD). Many studies have developed cutoff points of anthropometric indices for predicting these diseases. The aim of this systematic review was to differentiate the screening potential of body mass index (BMI), waist circumference (WC), and waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) for adult CVD risk.

methodsWe used relevant key words to search electronic databases to identify studies published up to 2019 that used receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for assessing the cut-off points of anthropometric indices. We used a random-effects model to pool study results and assessed between-study heterogeneity by using the I

resultsThis meta-analysis included 38 cross-sectional and 2 cohort studies with 105 to 137,256 participants aged 18 or older. The pooled area under the ROC curve (AUC) value for BMI was 0.66 (95% CI, 0.63-0.69) in both men and women. The pooled AUC values for WC were 0.69 (95% CI, 0.67-0.70) in men and 0.69 (95% CI, 0.64-0.74) in women, and the pooled AUC values for WHR were 0.69 (95% CI, 0.66-0.73) in men and 0.71 (95% CI, 0.68-0.73) in women.

conclusionOur findings indicated a slight difference between AUC values of these anthropometric indices. However, indices of abdominal obesity, especially WHR, can better predict CVD occurrence.

Indexed as

Body Mass IndexWaist CircumferenceWaist-Hip RatioAdultCardiometabolic Risk FactorsCardiovascular DiseasesFemaleHumansMaleReference StandardsRisk AssessmentROC Curve

Identifiers

PMID33092686
PMCPMC7587303

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.