Hailey R Banack1, Jean Wactawski-Wende1, Kathleen M Hovey1, Andrew Stokes2. 1. Department of Epidemiology and Environmental Health, School of Public Health and Health Professions, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York, Buffalo, NY. 2. Department of Global Health and Center for Global Health and Development, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Body mass index (BMI) is a widely used indicator of obesity status in clinical settings and population health research. However, there are concerns about the validity of BMI as a measure of obesity in postmenopausal women. Unlike BMI, which is an indirect measure of obesity and does not distinguish lean from fat mass, dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) provides a direct measure of body fat and is considered a gold standard of adiposity measurement. The goal of this study is to examine the validity of using BMI to identify obesity in postmenopausal women relative to total body fat percent measured by DXA scan. METHODS: Data from 1,329 postmenopausal women participating in the Buffalo OsteoPerio Study were used in this analysis. At baseline, women ranged in age from 53 to 85 years. Obesity was defined as BMI ≥ 30 kg/m and body fat percent (BF%) greater than 35%, 38%, or 40%. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value to evaluate the validity of BMI-defined obesity relative BF%. We further explored the validity of BMI relative to BF% using graphical tools, such as scatterplots and receiver-operating characteristic curves. Youden's J index was used to determine the empirical optimal BMI cut-point for each level of BF% defined obesity. RESULTS: The sensitivity of BMI-defined obesity was 32.4% for 35% body fat, 44.6% for 38% body fat, and 55.2% for 40% body fat. Corresponding specificity values were 99.3%, 97.1%, and 94.6%, respectively. The empirical optimal BMI cut-point to define obesity is 24.9 kg/m for 35% BF, 26.49 kg/m for 38% BF, and 27.05 kg/m for 40% BF according to the Youden's index. CONCLUSIONS: Results demonstrate that a BMI cut-point of 30 kg/m does not appear to be an appropriate indicator of true obesity status in postmenopausal women. Empirical estimates of the validity of BMI from this study may be used by other investigators to account for BMI-related misclassification in older women.
OBJECTIVE: Body mass index (BMI) is a widely used indicator of obesity status in clinical settings and population health research. However, there are concerns about the validity of BMI as a measure of obesity in postmenopausal women. Unlike BMI, which is an indirect measure of obesity and does not distinguish lean from fat mass, dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) provides a direct measure of body fat and is considered a gold standard of adiposity measurement. The goal of this study is to examine the validity of using BMI to identify obesity in postmenopausal women relative to total body fat percent measured by DXA scan. METHODS: Data from 1,329 postmenopausal women participating in the Buffalo OsteoPerio Study were used in this analysis. At baseline, women ranged in age from 53 to 85 years. Obesity was defined as BMI ≥ 30 kg/m and body fat percent (BF%) greater than 35%, 38%, or 40%. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value to evaluate the validity of BMI-defined obesity relative BF%. We further explored the validity of BMI relative to BF% using graphical tools, such as scatterplots and receiver-operating characteristic curves. Youden's J index was used to determine the empirical optimal BMI cut-point for each level of BF% defined obesity. RESULTS: The sensitivity of BMI-defined obesity was 32.4% for 35% body fat, 44.6% for 38% body fat, and 55.2% for 40% body fat. Corresponding specificity values were 99.3%, 97.1%, and 94.6%, respectively. The empirical optimal BMI cut-point to define obesity is 24.9 kg/m for 35% BF, 26.49 kg/m for 38% BF, and 27.05 kg/m for 40% BF according to the Youden's index. CONCLUSIONS: Results demonstrate that a BMI cut-point of 30 kg/m does not appear to be an appropriate indicator of true obesity status in postmenopausal women. Empirical estimates of the validity of BMI from this study may be used by other investigators to account for BMI-related misclassification in older women.
Authors: Carolyn C Gotay; Peter T Katzmarzyk; Ian Janssen; Marliese Y Dawson; Khatereh Aminoltejari; Nicci L Bartley Journal: Can J Public Health Date: 2012-11-08
Authors: Katherine M Flegal; John A Shepherd; Anne C Looker; Barry I Graubard; Lori G Borrud; Cynthia L Ogden; Tamara B Harris; James E Everhart; Nathaniel Schenker Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2008-12-30 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Robert M Blew; Luis B Sardinha; Laura A Milliken; Pedro J Teixeira; Scott B Going; Dawna L Ferreira; Margaret M Harris; Linda B Houtkooper; Timothy G Lohman Journal: Obes Res Date: 2002-08
Authors: Kara L Marlatt; Leanne M Redman; Robbie A Beyl; Steve R Smith; Catherine M Champagne; Fanchao Yi; Jennifer C Lovejoy Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2019-10-11 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Elizabeth L Kacel; Janae L Kirsch; Timothy S Sannes; Seema Patidar; Rachel Postupack; Sally Jensen; Shan Wong; Stephanie Garey; Stacy Dodd; Chantel M Ulfig; Christina S McCrae; Michael E Robinson; Jacqueline Castagno; Gregory S Schultz; Deidre B Pereira Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 4.267
Authors: Ayesha A Javed; Jinhui Ma; Laura N Anderson; Alexandra J Mayhew; Hon Yiu So; Lauren E Griffith; Anne Gilsing; Parminder Raina Journal: Int J Obes (Lond) Date: 2022-01-29 Impact factor: 5.095
Authors: Kara L Marlatt; Dori R Pitynski-Miller; Kathleen M Gavin; Kerrie L Moreau; Edward L Melanson; Nanette Santoro; Wendy M Kohrt Journal: Obesity (Silver Spring) Date: 2022-01 Impact factor: 5.002
Authors: Hailey R Banack; Andrew Stokes; Matthew P Fox; Kathleen M Hovey; Elizabeth M Cespedes Feliciano; Erin S LeBlanc; Chloe Bird; Bette J Caan; Candyce H Kroenke; Matthew A Allison; Scott B Going; Linda Snetselaar; Ting-Yuan David Cheng; Rowan T Chlebowski; Marcia L Stefanick; Michael J LaMonte; Jean Wactawski-Wende Journal: Epidemiology Date: 2018-09 Impact factor: 4.822
Authors: Jenalee R Doom; Brie M Reid; Emily Nagel; Sheila Gahagan; Ellen W Demerath; Julie C Lumeng Journal: Dev Psychobiol Date: 2020-09-09 Impact factor: 3.038
Authors: Alessandra T Andreacchi; Lauren E Griffith; G Emmanuel Guindon; Alexandra Mayhew; Carol Bassim; Marie Pigeyre; Saverio Stranges; Laura N Anderson Journal: Int J Obes (Lond) Date: 2021-01-11 Impact factor: 5.095
Authors: Juan Reyes-Barrera; Victor H Sainz-Escárrega; Aida X Medina-Urritia; Esteban Jorge-Galarza; Horacio Osorio-Alonso; Margarita Torres-Tamayo; Gabriela Leal-Escobar; Carlos Posadas-Romero; Ivan Torre-Villalvazo; Juan G Juárez-Rojas Journal: Adipocyte Date: 2021-12 Impact factor: 4.534
Authors: S C Ibeneme; C Ekanem; A Ezuma; N Iloanusi; N N Lasebikan; O A Lasebikan; O E Oboh Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2018-03-15 Impact factor: 2.362