Blog
About

28
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Validity and predictors of BMI derived from self-reported height and weight among 11- to 17-year-old German adolescents from the KiGGS study

      , 1 , 1 , 1

      BMC Research Notes

      BioMed Central

      Read this article at

      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

          Background

          For practical and financial reasons, self-reported instead of measured height and weight are often used. The aim of this study is to evaluate the validity of self-reports and to identify potential predictors of the validity of body mass index (BMI) derived from self-reported height and weight.

          Findings

          Self-reported and measured data were collected from a sub-sample (3,468 adolescents aged 11-17) from the German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents (KiGGS). BMI was calculated from both reported and measured values, and these were compared in descriptive analyses. Linear regression models with BMI difference (self-reported minus measured) and logistic regression models with weight status misclassifications as dependent variables were calculated.

          Height was overestimated by 14- to 17-year-olds. Overall, boys and girls under-reported their weight. On average, BMI values calculated from self-reports were lower than those calculated from measured values. This underestimation of BMI led to a bias in the prevalence rates of under- and overweight which was stronger in girls than in boys. Based on self-reports, the prevalence was 9.7% for underweight and 15.1% for overweight. However, according to measured data the corresponding rates were 7.5% and 17.7%, respectively. Linear regression for BMI difference showed significant differences according to measured weight status: BMI was overestimated by underweight adolescents and underestimated by overweight adolescents. When weight status was excluded from the model, body perception was statistically significant: Adolescents who regarded themselves as 'too fat' underestimated their BMI to a greater extent. Symptoms of a potential eating disorder, sexual maturation, socio-economic status (SES), school type, migration background and parental overweight showed no association with the BMI difference, but parental overweight was a consistent predictor of the misclassification of weight status defined by self-reports.

          Conclusions

          The present findings demonstrate that the observed discrepancy between self-reported and measured height and weight leads to inaccurate estimates of the prevalence of under- and overweight when based on self-reports. The collection of body perception data and parents' height and weight is therefore recommended in addition to self-reports. Use of a correction formula seems reasonable in order to correct for differences between self-reported and measured data.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 42

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Measuring agreement in method comparison studies.

          Agreement between two methods of clinical measurement can be quantified using the differences between observations made using the two methods on the same subjects. The 95% limits of agreement, estimated by mean difference +/- 1.96 standard deviation of the differences, provide an interval within which 95% of differences between measurements by the two methods are expected to lie. We describe how graphical methods can be used to investigate the assumptions of the method and we also give confidence intervals. We extend the basic approach to data where there is a relationship between difference and magnitude, both with a simple logarithmic transformation approach and a new, more general, regression approach. We discuss the importance of the repeatability of each method separately and compare an estimate of this to the limits of agreement. We extend the limits of agreement approach to data with repeated measurements, proposing new estimates for equal numbers of replicates by each method on each subject, for unequal numbers of replicates, and for replicated data collected in pairs, where the underlying value of the quantity being measured is changing. Finally, we describe a nonparametric approach to comparing methods.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Measuring agreement in method comparison studies

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Health consequences of obesity.

               J Reilly (2003)
              The recent epidemic of childhood obesity(1) has raised concern because of the possible clinical and public health consequences.(2,)(3) However, there remains a widespread perception among health professionals that childhood obesity is a largely cosmetic problem, with minor clinical effects. No systematic review has yet focused on the diverse array of possible consequences of childhood obesity, though older non-systematic reviews are available.(4,)(5) In addition, no review to date has considered the vast body of evidence on the health impact of childhood obesity which has been published recently. The aim of the present review was therefore to provide a critically appraised, evidence based, summary of the consequences of childhood obesity in the short term (for the child) and longer term (in adulthood).
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMC Res Notes
                BMC Research Notes
                BioMed Central
                1756-0500
                2011
                17 October 2011
                : 4
                : 414
                1756-0500-4-414
                10.1186/1756-0500-4-414
                3216908
                22005143
                Copyright ©2011 Brettschneider et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                Categories
                Short Report

                Medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article