Dataset Information

The usefulness of "corrected" body mass index vs. self-reported body mass index: comparing the population distributions, sensitivity, specificity, and predictive utility of three correction equations using Canadian population-based data.

ABSTRACT:

Background

National data on body mass index (BMI), computed from self-reported height and weight, is readily available for many populations including the Canadian population. Because self-reported weight is found to be systematically under-reported, it has been proposed that the bias in self-reported BMI can be corrected using equations derived from data sets which include both self-reported and measured height and weight. Such correction equations have been developed and adopted. We aim to evaluate the usefulness (i.e., distributional similarity; sensitivity and specificity; and predictive utility vis-à-vis disease outcomes) of existing and new correction equations in population-based research.

Methods

The Canadian Community Health Surveys from 2005 and 2008 include both measured and self-reported values of height and weight, which allows for construction and evaluation of correction equations. We focused on adults age 18-65, and compared three correction equations (two correcting weight only, and one correcting BMI) against self-reported and measured BMI. We first compared population distributions of BMI. Second, we compared the sensitivity and specificity of self-reported BMI and corrected BMI against measured BMI. Third, we compared the self-reported and corrected BMI in terms of association with health outcomes using logistic regression.

Results

All corrections outperformed self-report when estimating the full BMI distribution; the weight-only correction outperformed the BMI-only correction for females in the 23-28 kg/m2 BMI range. In terms of sensitivity/specificity, when estimating obesity prevalence, corrected values of BMI (from any equation) were superior to self-report. In terms of modelling BMI-disease outcome associations, findings were mixed, with no correction proving consistently superior to self-report.

Conclusions

If researchers are interested in modelling the full population distribution of BMI, or estimating the prevalence of obesity in a population, then a correction of any kind included in this study is recommended. If the researcher is interested in using BMI as a predictor variable for modelling disease, then both self-reported and corrected BMI result in biased estimates of association.

SUBMITTER: Dutton DJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4108015 | biostudies-literature | 2014 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The usefulness of "corrected" body mass index vs. self-reported body mass index: comparing the population distributions, sensitivity, specificity, and predictive utility of three correction equations using Canadian population-based data.

Dutton Daniel J DJ McLaren Lindsay L

BMC public health 20140506

<h4>Background</h4>National data on body mass index (BMI), computed from self-reported height and weight, is readily available for many populations including the Canadian population. Because self-reported weight is found to be systematically under-reported, it has been proposed that the bias in self-reported BMI can be corrected using equations derived from data sets which include both self-reported and measured height and weight. Such correction equations have been developed and adopted. We aim ...[more]

PMID: 24885210

Similar Datasets

Project description:Depression and obesity are complex global health problems. Recent studies suggest that a genetic predisposition to obesity might be accentuated in people with depression, but these analyses are prone to bias. Here, we tested the hypothesis that depression accentuates genetic susceptibility to obesity and applied negative control experiments to test whether any observed interactions were real or driven by confounding and statistical biases. We used data from up to 378 000 Europeans in UK Biobank, a 73 variant body mass index (BMI) genetic risk score, two depression measures [depression symptoms (DS), major depression (MD)] and an antidepressant usage variable available. We tested whether (i) depression and (ii) antidepressant treatment accentuated genetic susceptibility to obesity. Finally, we performed negative control experiments by sampling individuals at random so that they had BMI distributions identical to depression cases and controls. Depression was associated with an accentuation of an individual's genetic risk of obesity with evidence of interactions for both DS and MD (Pinteraction = 7 × 10-4 and 7 × 10-5 respectively). Antidepressant usage within DS cases accentuated genetic obesity risk (Pinteraction = 9 × 10-4), but not for MD (Pinteraction = 0.13). Negative control experiments suggested that the observed interactions for MD (empirical-P = 0.067) may be driven by statistical biases or confounding factors but were not possible with the larger DS groups. Antidepressant usage interaction also appears to be driven by statistical artefacts (empirical-P = 0.510 using MD and 0.162 using DS). We have highlighted the importance of running negative experiments to confirm putative interactions in gene-environment studies. We provide some tentative evidence that depression accentuates an individual's genetic susceptibility to higher BMI but demonstrated that the BMI distributions within cases and controls might drive these interactions.

Project description:ImportanceObesity is a global health challenge and a risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASVCD). Performance of the pooled cohort equations (PCE) for ASCVD risk by body mass index (BMI; calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) is unknown.ObjectiveTo assess performance of the PCE across clinical BMI categories.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study used pooled individual-level data from 8 community-based, prospective, longitudinal cohort studies with 10-year ASCVD event follow-up from 1996 to 2016. We included all adults ages 40 to 79 years without baseline ASCVD or statin use, resulting in a sample size of 37 311 participants. Data were analyzed from August 2017 to July 2020.ExposuresParticipant BMI category: underweight (<18.5), normal weight (18.5 to <25), overweight (25 to <30), mild obesity (30 to <35), and moderate to severe obesity (≥35).Main outcomes and measuresDiscrimination (Harrell C statistic) and calibration (Nam-D'Agostino χ2 goodness-of-fit test) of the PCE across BMI categories. Improvement in discrimination and net reclassification with addition of BMI, waist circumference, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) to the PCE.ResultsAmong 37 311 participants (mean [SD] age, 58.6 [11.8] years; 21 897 [58.7%] women), 380 604 person-years of follow-up were conducted. Mean (SD) baseline BMI was 29.0 (6.2), and 360 individuals (1.0%) were in the underweight category, 9937 individuals (26.6%) were in the normal weight category, 13 601 individuals (36.4%) were in the overweight category, 7783 individuals (20.9%) were in the mild obesity category, and 5630 individuals (15.1%) were in the moderate to severe obesity category. Median (interquartile range [IQR]) 10-year estimated ASCVD risk was 7.1% (2.5%-15.4%), and 3709 individuals (9.9%) developed ASCVD over a median (IQR) 10.8 [8.5-12.6] years. The PCE overestimated ASCVD risk in the overall cohort (estimated/observed [E/O] risk ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.18-1.26) and across all BMI categories except the underweight category. Calibration was better near the clinical decision threshold in all BMI groups but worse among individuals with moderate or severe obesity (E/O risk ratio, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.25-1.47) and among those with the highest estimated ASCVD risk ≥20%. The PCE C statistic overall was 0.760 (95% CI, 0.753-0.767), with lower discrimination in the moderate or severe obesity group (C statistic, 0.742; 95% CI, 0.721-0.763) compared with the normal-range BMI group (C statistic, 0.785; 95% CI, 0.772-0.798). Waist circumference (hazard ratio, 1.07 per 1-SD increase; 95% CI, 1.03-1.11) and hsCRP (hazard ratio, 1.07 per 1-SD increase; 95% CI, 1.05-1.09), but not BMI, were associated with increased ASCVD risk when added to the PCE. However, these factors did not improve model performance (C statistic, 0.760; 95% CI, 0.753-0.767) with or without added metrics.Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that the PCE had acceptable model discrimination and were well calibrated at clinical decision thresholds but overestimated risk of ASCVD for individuals in overweight and obese categories, particularly individuals with high estimated risk. Incorporation of the usual clinical measures of obesity did not improve risk estimation of the PCE. Future research is needed to determine whether incorporation of alternative high-risk obesity markers (eg, weight trajectory or measures of visceral or ectopic fat) into the PCE may improve risk prediction.

Project description:BackgroundOverweight and obesity is a serious problem worldwide related to cardiovascular and other diseases. Personality traits are associated with the abnormal body mass indices (BMIs) indicative of overweight and obesity. However, the links between personality traits and BMI have been little studied in Korea.MethodsWe evaluated the association between personality traits and BMI in men and women using the rural Ansung and urban Ansan cohort from the Korean Genome Epidemiology Study, and the Kangbuk Samsung Hospital Cohort Study datasets. A shorter version of the original Revised Neuroticism-Extroversion-Openness Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) was used to measure the five-factor model of personality (neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness).ResultsData from a total of 1,495 men (mean age 60.0 ± 9.8 years; mean BMI 24.3 ± 3.0 kg/m2) and 2,547 women (mean age 47.0 ± 15.5 years; mean BMI 22.8 ± 3.4 kg/m2) were included in the analysis. Compared with the normal weight groups, overweight and obese men scored higher on openness to experience and lower on conscientiousness. Overweight and obese women scored lower on neuroticism and openness to experience and higher on agreeableness. Extraversion was positively associated with BMI in men (β=0.032, P<0.05). BMI and waist circumference were significantly increased in individuals who were less dutiful. In women, neuroticism was inversely associated with BMI (β=-0.026, P<0.05). Openness to experience was negatively, and agreeableness was positively, associated with BMI (openness to experience: β=-0.072, agreeableness β=0.068) and waist circumference (openness to experience: β=-0.202, agreeableness: β=0.227) (P<0.05).ConclusionPersonality traits were associated with underweight, overweight, and obesity in men and women. Increased understanding of the underlying factors contributing to this association will aid in the prevention and treatment of abnormal BMI.

Dataset Information

The usefulness of "corrected" body mass index vs. self-reported body mass index: comparing the population distributions, sensitivity, specificity, and predictive utility of three correction equations using Canadian population-based data.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

The usefulness of "corrected" body mass index vs. self-reported body mass index: comparing the population distributions, sensitivity, specificity, and predictive utility of three correction equations using Canadian population-based data.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets