Dataset Information

Comparing apples and pears: women's perceptions of their body size and shape.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Obesity is a growing public health problem among reproductive-aged women, with consequences for chronic disease risk and reproductive and obstetric morbidities. Evidence also suggests that body shape (i.e., regional fat distribution) may be independently associated with risk, yet it is not known if women adequately perceive their shape. This study aimed to assess the validity of self-reported body size and shape figure drawings when compared to anthropometric measures among reproductive-aged women.

Methods

Self-reported body size was ascertained using the Stunkard nine-level figures and self-reported body shape using stylized pear, hourglass, rectangle, and apple figures. Anthropometry was performed by trained researchers. Body size and body mass index (BMI) were compared using Spearman's correlation coefficient. Fat distribution indicators were compared across body shapes for nonobese and obese women using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Fisher's exact test. Percent agreement and kappa statistics were computed for apple and pear body shapes.

Results

The 131 women studied were primarily Caucasian (81%), aged 32 years, with a mean BMI of 27.1 kg/m(2) (range 16.6-52.8 kg/m(2)). The correlation between body size and BMI was 0.85 (p<0.001). Among nonobese women, waist-to-hip ratios (WHR) were 0.75, 0.75, 0.80, and 0.82 for pear, hourglass, rectangle, and apple, respectively (p<0.001). Comparing apples and pears, the percent agreement (kappa) for WHR≥0.80 was 83% (0.55).

Conclusions

Self-reported size and shape were consistent with anthropometric measures commonly used to assess obesity and fat distribution, respectively. Self-reported body shape may be a useful proxy measure in addition to body size in large-scale surveys.

SUBMITTER: Thoma ME

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3466911 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionBiological sex influences both overall adiposity and fat distribution. Further, testosterone and sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG) influence adiposity and metabolic function, with differential effects of testosterone in men and women. Here, we aimed to perform sex-stratified genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of body fat percentage (BFPAdj) (adjusting for testosterone and sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG)) to increase statistical power.MethodsGWAS were performed in white British individuals from the UK Biobank (157,937 males and 154,337 females). To avoid collider bias, loci associated with SHBG or testosterone were excluded. We investigated association of BFPAdj loci with high density cholesterol (HDL), triglyceride (TG), type 2 diabetes (T2D), coronary artery disease (CAD), and MRI-derived abdominal subcutaneous adipose tissue (ASAT), visceral adipose tissue (VAT) and gluteofemoral adipose tissue (GFAT) using publicly available data from large GWAS. We also performed 2-sample Mendelian Randomization (MR) using identified BFPAdj variants as instruments to investigate causal effect of BFPAdj on HDL, TG, T2D and CAD in males and females separately.ResultsWe identified 195 and 174 loci explaining 3.35% and 2.60% of the variation in BFPAdj in males and females, respectively at genome-wide significance (GWS, p<5x10-8). Although the direction of effect at these loci was generally concordant in males and females, only 38 loci were common to both sexes at GWS. Seven loci in males and ten loci in females have not been associated with any adiposity/cardiometabolic traits previously. BFPAdj loci generally did not associate with cardiometabolic traits; several had paradoxically beneficial cardiometabolic effects with favourable fat distribution. MR analyses did not find convincing supportive evidence that increased BFPAdj has deleterious cardiometabolic effects in either sex with highly significant heterogeneity.ConclusionsThere was limited genetic overlap between BFPAdj in males and females at GWS. BFPAdj loci generally did not have adverse cardiometabolic effects which may reflect the effects of favourable fat distribution and cardiometabolic risk modulation by testosterone and SHBG.