Alyse Davies1, Lyndal Wellard-Cole2, Anna Rangan2, Margaret Allman-Farinelli2. 1. The University of Sydney, Nutrition and Dietetics Group, School of Life and Environmental Science, Charles Perkins Center, New South Wales, Australia. Electronic address: adav5418@uni.sydney.edu.au. 2. The University of Sydney, Nutrition and Dietetics Group, School of Life and Environmental Science, Charles Perkins Center, New South Wales, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to validate self-reported anthropometric measurements and body mass index (BMI) classifications in a young adult population. METHODS: Both self-reported and directly measured weight and height of 100 young adults 18 to 30 y of age were collected. Participants were measured at one of two university clinics by two research dietitians and within 2 wk self-reported their body weight and height via a questionnaire as part of a larger study. BMI was calculated and categorized according to the World Health Organization's cut-points for underweight, healthy weight, and overweight or obesity. The validity of measured against self-reported weight and height was examined using Pearson's correlation, Bland-Altman plots, and Cohen's kappa statistic. RESULTS: Strong correlation was observed between measured and self-reported weight (r = 0.99; P < 0.001), height (r = 0.95; P < 0.001), and BMI (r = 0.94; P < 0.001). Bland-Altman plots indicated that the mean difference between self-reported and direct BMI measurements were small in the total sample (0.1 kg/m2). The majority of values fell within the limits of agreement (2 SD), with random scatter plots and no systemic bias detected. The classification of BMI from self-reported and direct measurements showed that 88% were placed in the equivalent weight category with very good agreement Cohen's kappa (0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.63-0.89; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Good agreement was detected between self-reported and direct anthropometric measurements. The criticism of self-reported anthropometric measurements is unwarranted. The findings provide support for using self-reported height and weight data for research in Australian young adults when direct measurements are not feasible.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to validate self-reported anthropometric measurements and body mass index (BMI) classifications in a young adult population. METHODS: Both self-reported and directly measured weight and height of 100 young adults 18 to 30 y of age were collected. Participants were measured at one of two university clinics by two research dietitians and within 2 wk self-reported their body weight and height via a questionnaire as part of a larger study. BMI was calculated and categorized according to the World Health Organization's cut-points for underweight, healthy weight, and overweight or obesity. The validity of measured against self-reported weight and height was examined using Pearson's correlation, Bland-Altman plots, and Cohen's kappa statistic. RESULTS: Strong correlation was observed between measured and self-reported weight (r = 0.99; P < 0.001), height (r = 0.95; P < 0.001), and BMI (r = 0.94; P < 0.001). Bland-Altman plots indicated that the mean difference between self-reported and direct BMI measurements were small in the total sample (0.1 kg/m2). The majority of values fell within the limits of agreement (2 SD), with random scatter plots and no systemic bias detected. The classification of BMI from self-reported and direct measurements showed that 88% were placed in the equivalent weight category with very good agreement Cohen's kappa (0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.63-0.89; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Good agreement was detected between self-reported and direct anthropometric measurements. The criticism of self-reported anthropometric measurements is unwarranted. The findings provide support for using self-reported height and weight data for research in Australian young adults when direct measurements are not feasible.
Authors: Alyse Davies; Virginia Chan; Adrian Bauman; Louise Signal; Cameron Hosking; Luke Gemming; Margaret Allman-Farinelli Journal: Eur J Nutr Date: 2020-09-04 Impact factor: 5.614
Authors: Alyse Davies; Margaret Allman-Farinelli; Katherine Owen; Louise Signal; Cameron Hosking; Leanne Wang; Adrian Bauman Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-12-13 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Ruxing Wu; Bingqian Zhu; Rongfeng Chen; Liqun Chen; Runan Chen; Daqiao Zhu Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-05-13 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Lyndal Wellard-Cole; Alyse Davies; Juliana Chen; Jisu Jung; Kim B Bente; Judy Kay; Wendy L Watson; Clare Hughes; Anna Rangan; Kalina Yacef; Irena Koprinska; Kathy Chapman; Nim Ting Wong; Luke Gemming; Cliona Ni Mhurchu; Adrian Bauman; Margaret Allman-Farinelli Journal: Nutrients Date: 2021-05-21 Impact factor: 5.717
Authors: Virginia Chan; Alyse Davies; Lyndal Wellard-Cole; Silvia Lu; Hoi Ng; Lok Tsoi; Anjali Tiscia; Louise Signal; Anna Rangan; Luke Gemming; Margaret Allman-Farinelli Journal: Nutrients Date: 2021-05-26 Impact factor: 5.717