OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the validity of self-reported weight and height and the body mass index (BMI). METHODS: A study was made of 3,713 employees of a public university in Rio de Janeiro, in which they were participants in Phase 1 of a longitudinal study. Information was obtained through a self-administered questionnaire, and measurements were carried out after its application. Student's paired t-test, Bland & Altman's graphs and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were utilized to evaluate the differences between the measured and the reported parameters. The sensitivity and specificity of the various BMI categories were estimated. RESULTS: There was high agreement between the measured and reported weights (ICC=0.977) and heights (ICC=0.943). The BMI sensitivity, in its various categories, was around 80%, and the specificity was close to 92%. There was a slight and uniform tendency toward self-reported weight underestimation and self-reported height overestimation in both sexes. CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported and measured weight and height information had good agreement and validity. In similar populations, when few resources are available, it is possible to use self-reported data instead of actual measurements.
OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the validity of self-reported weight and height and the body mass index (BMI). METHODS: A study was made of 3,713 employees of a public university in Rio de Janeiro, in which they were participants in Phase 1 of a longitudinal study. Information was obtained through a self-administered questionnaire, and measurements were carried out after its application. Student's paired t-test, Bland & Altman's graphs and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were utilized to evaluate the differences between the measured and the reported parameters. The sensitivity and specificity of the various BMI categories were estimated. RESULTS: There was high agreement between the measured and reported weights (ICC=0.977) and heights (ICC=0.943). The BMI sensitivity, in its various categories, was around 80%, and the specificity was close to 92%. There was a slight and uniform tendency toward self-reported weight underestimation and self-reported height overestimation in both sexes. CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported and measured weight and height information had good agreement and validity. In similar populations, when few resources are available, it is possible to use self-reported data instead of actual measurements.
Authors: Felicia Castriota; Johanna Acevedo; Catterina Ferreccio; Allan H Smith; Jane Liaw; Martyn T Smith; Craig Steinmaus Journal: Environ Res Date: 2018-07-27 Impact factor: 6.498
Authors: Aldair J Oliveira; Claudia S Lopes; Antônio C Ponce de Leon; Mikael Rostila; Rosane H Griep; Guilherme L Werneck; Eduardo Faerstein Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2011-07-26 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Vinícius Muller Reis Weber; Marcos Roberto Queiroga; André Luiz Kiihn; Luiz Augusto da-Silva; Sandra Aires Ferreira; Bruno Sergio Portela Journal: Rev Bras Med Trab Date: 2020-01-09
Authors: Rosane Härter Griep; Leonardo S Bastos; Maria de Jesus Mendes da Fonseca; Aline Silva-Costa; Luciana Fernandes Portela; Susanna Toivanen; Lucia Rotenberg Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2014-11-29 Impact factor: 2.655