Literature DB >> 15789165

Validity of self-reported weight and height: comparison between immigrant and non-immigrant Mexican Americans in NHANES III.

Soo-Kyung Lee1.   

Abstract

This study examined whether 1) the immigrant Mexican Americans reported weight and height differently from the non-immigrant Mexican Americans and, 2) self-reporting errors influenced weight classification. A U.S. national sample of 3085 Mexican Americans from the third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey was used to investigate validity using paired t-tests, multiple linear regressions, sensitivity and specificity. While immigrant Mexican American women reported their weight and height higher than non-immigrant women, no significant differences were found between immigrant and non-immigrant Mexican American men. Sensitivity and specificity of weight classification with self-reported weight and height were not different between immigrant and non-immigrant Mexican Americans; however, underweight Mexican Americans showed the lowest sensitivity. Therefore, self-reported weight and height can be used for the purpose of weight classification with immigrant and non-immigrant Mexican Americans, with an exception of underweight Mexican Americans.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15789165     DOI: 10.1007/s10903-005-2646-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Immigr Health        ISSN: 1096-4045


  17 in total

1.  Acculturation and health in Korean Americans.

Authors:  S K Lee; J Sobal; E A Frongillo
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 4.634

2.  Latinos' health care access: financial and cultural barriers.

Authors:  Patricia I Documét; Ravi K Sharma
Journal:  J Immigr Health       Date:  2004-01

3.  Prevalence of obesity, diabetes, and obesity-related health risk factors, 2001.

Authors:  Ali H Mokdad; Earl S Ford; Barbara A Bowman; William H Dietz; Frank Vinicor; Virginia S Bales; James S Marks
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2003-01-01       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Body mass definitions of obesity: sensitivity and specificity using self-reported weight and height.

Authors:  F J Nieto-García; T L Bush; P M Keyl
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  1990-03       Impact factor: 4.822

5.  The disease burden associated with overweight and obesity.

Authors:  A Must; J Spadano; E H Coakley; A E Field; G Colditz; W H Dietz
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1999-10-27       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  The relationship between body weight and mortality: a quantitative analysis of combined information from existing studies.

Authors:  R P Troiano; E A Frongillo; J Sobal; D A Levitsky
Journal:  Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord       Date:  1996-01

7.  Relationship of satisfaction with body size and trying to lose weight in a national survey of overweight and obese women aged 40 and older, United States.

Authors:  Lynda A Anderson; Amy A Eyler; Deborah A Galuska; David R Brown; Ross C Brownson
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 4.018

8.  Adolescent obesity increases significantly in second and third generation U.S. immigrants: the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health.

Authors:  B M Popkin; J R Udry
Journal:  J Nutr       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 4.798

9.  Racial and ethnic disparities in cancer screening: the importance of foreign birth as a barrier to care.

Authors:  Mita Sanghavi Goel; Christina C Wee; Ellen P McCarthy; Roger B Davis; Quyen Ngo-Metzger; Russell S Phillips
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  The validity of self-reported weight in US adults: a population based cross-sectional study.

Authors:  E V Villanueva
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2001-11-06       Impact factor: 3.295

View more
  9 in total

1.  Sex and ethnic differences in validity of self-reported adult height, weight and body mass index.

Authors:  Ming Wen; Lori Kowaleski-Jones
Journal:  Ethn Dis       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 1.847

2.  Immigration and generational trends in body mass index and obesity in the United States: results of the National Latino and Asian American Survey, 2002-2003.

Authors:  Lisa M Bates; Dolores Acevedo-Garcia; Margarita Alegría; Nancy Krieger
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2007-11-29       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  Integrated electronic platforms for weight loss.

Authors:  Shelly K McCrady-Spitzer; James A Levine
Journal:  Expert Rev Med Devices       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 3.166

4.  Neighborhood socioeconomic status and BMI differences by immigrant and legal status: evidence from Utah.

Authors:  Ming Wen; Thomas N Maloney
Journal:  Econ Hum Biol       Date:  2013-04-05       Impact factor: 2.184

5.  Mexico-United States migration and the prevalence of obesity: a transnational perspective.

Authors:  Karen R Flórez; Tamara Dubowitz; Naomi Saito; Guilherme Borges; Joshua Breslau
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2012-12-10

6.  Immigrant obesity and unhealthy assimilation: alternative estimates of convergence or divergence, 1995-2005.

Authors:  Julie Park; Dowell Myers; Dennis Kao; SeongHee Min
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2009-10-05       Impact factor: 4.634

7.  Underestimation of adolescent obesity.

Authors:  Alison M Buttenheim; Noreen Goldman; Anne R Pebley
Journal:  Nurs Res       Date:  2013 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.381

8.  Accuracy of Self-reported Weight in Hispanic/Latino Adults of the Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos.

Authors:  Lindsay Fernández-Rhodes; Whitney R Robinson; Daniela Sotres-Alvarez; Nora Franceschini; Sheila F Castañeda; Christina Buelna; Ashley Moncrieft; Maria Llabre; Martha L Daviglus; Qibin Qi; Anita Agarwal; Carmen R Isasi; Paul Smokowski; Penny Gordon-Larsen; Kari E North
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 4.822

9.  Mental ill-health across the continuum of body mass index.

Authors:  Shona J Kelly; Mark Daniel; Eleonora Dal Grande; Anne Taylor
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2011-10-05       Impact factor: 3.295

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.