Validity of self-reported BMI in older adults and an adjustment model
Standard
Validity of self-reported BMI in older adults and an adjustment model. / Vuksanović, Milena; Safer, Anton; Palm, Frederick; Stieglbauer, Gabriele ; Grau, Armin; Becher, Heiko.
in: BIOTECHNOL PROGR, Jahrgang 22, Nr. 3, 2014, S. 257-263.Publikationen: SCORING: Beitrag in Fachzeitschrift/Zeitung › SCORING: Zeitschriftenaufsatz › Forschung › Begutachtung
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Validity of self-reported BMI in older adults and an adjustment model
AU - Vuksanović, Milena
AU - Safer, Anton
AU - Palm, Frederick
AU - Stieglbauer, Gabriele
AU - Grau, Armin
AU - Becher, Heiko
N1 - © 2016 American Institute of Chemical Engineers.
PY - 2014
Y1 - 2014
N2 - Study objectivesTo determine reporting bias of self-reported vs. measured anthropometrics (body weight, height, body mass index, BMI), and to adjust self-reported BMI regarding the bias.MethodsWe compared self-reported with measured anthropometrics utilizing 659 control persons (age mean 68; range 37 to 80 years) from a case-control stroke study. The Bland-Altman approach examined the agreement between self-reported and measured values. A linear model was applied to correct the bias dependent on sex, age and self-reported BMI.ResultsUnder-reporting of weight and over-reporting of height was found. On average, this resulted in lower self-reported BMIs by 1.0 kg/m2 in men, 1.2 kg/m2 in women (p < 0.001). Bias correction of self-reported BMIs was derived from self-reported BMI (p < 0.001), age (p < 0.001), age-BMI interaction (p < 0.001) and sex (p < 0.05). Under-estimation of correct BMI resulted in the under-estimation of an overweight prevalence, with relatively low sensitivity regarding self-reported values (88 %). Our estimates should be recalibrated, if applied to other studies.ConclusionSelf-reported anthropometric measures are systematically biased despite high correlations with measured values. A correction removes the average bias and improves accuracy.
AB - Study objectivesTo determine reporting bias of self-reported vs. measured anthropometrics (body weight, height, body mass index, BMI), and to adjust self-reported BMI regarding the bias.MethodsWe compared self-reported with measured anthropometrics utilizing 659 control persons (age mean 68; range 37 to 80 years) from a case-control stroke study. The Bland-Altman approach examined the agreement between self-reported and measured values. A linear model was applied to correct the bias dependent on sex, age and self-reported BMI.ResultsUnder-reporting of weight and over-reporting of height was found. On average, this resulted in lower self-reported BMIs by 1.0 kg/m2 in men, 1.2 kg/m2 in women (p < 0.001). Bias correction of self-reported BMIs was derived from self-reported BMI (p < 0.001), age (p < 0.001), age-BMI interaction (p < 0.001) and sex (p < 0.05). Under-estimation of correct BMI resulted in the under-estimation of an overweight prevalence, with relatively low sensitivity regarding self-reported values (88 %). Our estimates should be recalibrated, if applied to other studies.ConclusionSelf-reported anthropometric measures are systematically biased despite high correlations with measured values. A correction removes the average bias and improves accuracy.
U2 - 10.1007/s10389-014-0619-6
DO - 10.1007/s10389-014-0619-6
M3 - SCORING: Journal article
C2 - 27677099
VL - 22
SP - 257
EP - 263
JO - BIOTECHNOL PROGR
JF - BIOTECHNOL PROGR
SN - 8756-7938
IS - 3
ER -
