scispace - formally typeset
Journal ArticleDOI

A comparison of direct vs. self-report measures for assessing height, weight and body mass index: a systematic review

TLDR
Overall, the data show trends of under‐reporting for weight and BMI and over-reporting for height, although the degree of the trend varies for men and women and the characteristics of the population being examined.
Abstract
Obesity is a rapidly increasing public health problem, with surveillance most often based on self-reported values of height and weight. We conducted a systematic review to determine what empirical evidence exists regarding the agreement between objective (measured) and subjective (reported) measures in assessing height, weight and body mass index (BMI). Five electronic databases were searched to identify observational and experimental studies on adult populations over the age of 18. Searching identified 64 citations that met the eligibility criteria and examined the relationship between self-reported and directly measured height or weight. Overall, the data show trends of under-reporting for weight and BMI and over-reporting for height, although the degree of the trend varies for men and women and the characteristics of the population being examined. Standard deviations were large indicating that there is a great deal of individual variability in reporting of results. Combining the results quantitatively was not possible because of the poor reporting of outcomes of interest. Accurate estimation of these variables is important as data from population studies such as those included in this review are often used to generate regional and national estimates of overweight and obesity and are in turn used by decision makers to allocate resources and set priorities in health.

read more

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Global, regional, and national prevalence of overweight and obesity in children and adults during 1980–2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013

Marie Ng, +141 more
- 30 Aug 2014 - 
TL;DR: The global, regional, and national prevalence of overweight and obesity in children and adults during 1980-2013 is estimated using a spatiotemporal Gaussian process regression model to estimate prevalence with 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs).
Journal ArticleDOI

Worldwide trends in body-mass index, underweight, overweight, and obesity from 1975 to 2016: a pooled analysis of 2416 population-based measurement studies in 128·9 million children, adolescents, and adults

Leandra Abarca-Gómez, +1024 more
- 16 Dec 2017 - 
TL;DR: Trends in mean BMI have recently flattened in northwestern Europe and the high-income English-speaking and Asia-Pacific regions for both sexes, southwestern Europe for boys, and central and Andean Latin America for girls, and by contrast, the rise in BMI has accelerated in east and south Asia forboth sexes, and southeast Asia for boys.
Journal ArticleDOI

Trends in adult body-mass index in 200 countries from 1975 to 2014: A pooled analysis of 1698 population-based measurement studies with 19.2 million participants

Mariachiara Di Cesare, +741 more
- 02 Apr 2016 - 
TL;DR: The posterior probability of meeting the target of halting by 2025 the rise in obesity at its 2010 levels, if post-2000 trends continue, is calculated.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials : is blinding necessary?

TL;DR: An instrument to assess the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in pain research is described and its use to determine the effect of rater blinding on the assessments of quality is described.
Journal ArticleDOI

The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions.

TL;DR: It is shown that it is feasible to develop a checklist that can be used to assess the methodological quality not only of randomised controlled trials but also non-randomised studies and it is possible to produce a Checklist that provides a profile of the paper, alerting reviewers to its particular methodological strengths and weaknesses.
Journal ArticleDOI

Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies.

TL;DR: The inability of case-mix adjustment methods to compensate for selection bias and the inability to identify non- randomised studies that are free of selection bias indicate that non-randomised studies should only be undertaken when RCTs are infeasible or unethical.
Journal ArticleDOI

Self-reported weight and height.

TL;DR: Self-reported weight and height are unreliable in important population subgroups and are directly related to a person's overweight status--bias and unreliability in self-report increased directly with the magnitude of overweight.
Journal ArticleDOI

Validity of self-reported height and weight in 4808 EPIC-Oxford participants.

TL;DR: Self-reported height and weight data are valid for identifying relationships in epidemiological studies and can be used to improve the accuracy of estimates of height, weight and BMI in analyses where anthropometric factors are the primary variables of interest.
Related Papers (5)