Blog
About

6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Validity and reliability of self-reported weight, height and body mass index from telephone interviews.

      Cadernos de saúde pública

      Adult, Urban Population, Sensitivity and Specificity, Self Concept, Reproducibility of Results, epidemiology, diagnosis, Obesity, Middle Aged, Male, Interviews as Topic, Humans, Female, Educational Status, Brazil, Body Weight, Body Mass Index, Body Height, Aged, 80 and over, Aged

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The objective of this study was to examine factors associated with the validity of self-reported anthropometric measures. The authors selected 726 adults, aged 40 or older, living in the greater metropolitan region of São Paulo, Brazil. Self-reported weights and heights obtained from telephone interviews were compared to values measured directly by means of a multicenter survey. Mean differences (+/-SD) between self-reported and measured weights and heights among men were 0.54 (+/-0.30kg) and 1.98 (+/-0.31cm); while among women, they were -0.48 (+/-0.23kg) and 3.97 (+/-0.28cm), respectively. Sensitivity and specificity to diagnose obesity were 71% and 98% for males, and 78% and 96%, for females, respectively. There was good agreement between measured and self-reported weights and body mass index (BMI) among both sexes, however, self-reported height was less reliable. Self-reported weight and height obtained from telephone interviews are valid to estimate the obesity prevalence in this population, although systematic bias was found. Thus, it is desirable that researchers develop their own equations depending on the population being studied.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          20209215

          Comments

          Comment on this article