ArticlePloS one2024
Validity of self-reported weight and height among female young adults in the United Arab Emirates.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- The accuracy of self-reported height, weight and BMI in a sample of emerging adult college students across California: an observational study.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Self-reported weight and height serve as important metrics in estimating overweight and obesity prevalence within epidemiological studies, primarily due to their cost and time efficiency. However, the accuracy and reliability of these self-reported measures remain controversial, with conflicting reports emerging from different regions. This study aims to compare self-reported weight and height with measured values among young female adults in the United Arab Emirates. A cross-sectional study of 131 female university students aged 17-27 reported their weight and height on a self-administered questionnaire and on the same day had their height and weight measured. Body Mass Index (BMI) values of both self-reported and measured weight and height were calculated and categorized according to the World Health Organization's cut-off points. Overall, 87% of students had a resultant self-reported BMI value within their actual BMI category. The mean differences between self-reported and measured weight and height in the present study were -0.92 kg and 0.38 cm, respectively. Results indicated strong agreement between self-reported and direct measurements, as demonstrated by weighted Kappa statistics (kappa = 0.87). Bland & Altman plots illustrated that the majority of values fell within the limits of agreement (2 SD), with no systemic bias detected. BMI calculated from self-reported data demonstrates high sensitivity and specificity. Linear regression analyses revealed that self-reported weight (r2 = 0.973; p<0.001), height (r2 = 0.902; p<0.001), and BMI (r2 = 0.964; p<0.001) accurately predicted measured weight, height, and BMI. The study's results highlight the ability of female university students in the UAE to accurately provide self-reports of their weight and height. This finding provides further support for the utilization of self-reported data on height and weight as a valid method for collecting anthropometric information.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.