Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37180355›Full record

ArticleSSM - population health2023

How tall am I again? A longitudinal analysis of the reliability of self-reported height.

Ann Evans, Edith Gray, Anna Reimondos

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in SSM - population health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Self-reported height and weight: timeliness and source of the participant information.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025
    Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Ann EvansSchool of Demography, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia.
Edith GraySchool of Demography, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia.
Anna ReimondosSchool of Demography, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Self-reported height measures are increasingly being included in large-scale surveys in order to measure BMI. There have been concerns about the validity of self-reported measures but there remains little understanding of why respondents may not give accurate height reports. We examine whether a lack of knowledge could be a contributing factor, by investigating the reliability of self-reported height over time and across countries. We use longitudinal data from four large-scale longitudinal surveys conducted in Australia, United States, United Kingdom, and Europe (14 countries) where survey respondents were asked to report their height over multiple time periods to measure the extent of consistency of height reports across time. The overall level of inconsistent reporting of height is largest in Australia and Europe. Individuals with lower levels of education were significantly more likely to give two height reports that differed by 5 cm or more. Across all countries, inconsistent reporting with large height differences between waves was also more common among those in older populations. The findings point to subgroups of the population exhibiting a lack of knowledge regarding their own height.

Identifiers

PMID37180355
PMCPMC10172826

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.