Dataset Information

Relationship between BMI with percentage body fat and obesity in Singaporean adults - The Yishun Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The main aim of this study was to the determine relationship between Body Mass Index (BMI) and percentage body fat (BF%) in Singaporean adults, derive a prediction model to estimate BF%, and to report population BF%. The secondary aim was to determine the prevalence of overweight and obesity based on BF% threshold and the new risk categories for obesity in Singaporean population.

Methods

This was a population-based study of 542 community-dwelling Singaporeans (21-90 years old, 43.1% men). Anthropometry and body composition were assessed. Relationship between BMI and BF% were analysed using multiple regression models. Prevalence of overweight and obesity were estimated using WHO and Singapore Ministry of Health (MOH) Clinical Practice Guidelines for BMI classification, and BF% cut-off points of 25 and 35% for men and women respectively.

Results

We derived a prediction model to estimate BF% based on BMI, age and sex. The current cohort of Singaporeans when compared to Caucasians in the US and Europe as well as a Singapore cohort from 20 years age have higher BF% when matched for BMI, age, and sex. The overall population-adjusted prevalence of obesity according to WHO International classification (BMI ≥30 kg/m²) was 12.9% (14.9% men; 11.0% women); and 26.6% (30.7% men; 22.8% women) according to the MOH classification (BMI ≥27.5 kg/m²). However, using the BF% cut-off (> 25% for men and > 35% for women) resulted in very high prevalence of obesity of 82.0% (80.2% men; 83.8% women).

Conclusion

There is a large discrepancy between BF% and BMI measured obesity in Singaporean adults. The results confirmed that Singaporean adults have higher BF% at lower BMI compared to US and Europe white counterparts; and that BF% in our population has increased over two decades.

SUBMITTER: Chen KK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8170923 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Air pollution has consistently been associated with cardiometabolic outcomes, although associations with obesity have only been recently reported. Studies of air pollution and adiposity have mostly relied on body mass index (BMI) rather than body fat percentage (BF%), and most have not accounted for noise as a possible confounder. Additionally, it is unknown whether genetic predisposition for obesity increases susceptibility to the obesogenic effects of air pollution. To help fill these gaps, we used the UK Biobank, a large, prospective cohort study in the United Kingdom, to explore the relationship between air pollution and adiposity, and modification by a polygenic risk score for BMI. We used 2010 annual averages of air pollution estimates from land use regression (NO2, NOX, PM2.5, PM2.5absorbance, PM2.5-10, PM10), traffic intensity (TI), inverse distance to road (IDTR), along with examiner-measured BMI, waist-hip-ratio (WHR), and impedance measures of BF%, which were collected at enrollment (2006-2010, n = 473,026) and at follow-up (2012-2013, n = 19,518). We estimated associations of air pollution with BMI, WHR, and BF% at enrollment and follow-up, and with obesity, abdominal obesity, and BF%-obesity at enrollment and follow-up. We used linear and logistic regression and controlled for noise and other covariates. We also assessed interactions of air pollution with a polygenic risk score for BMI. On average, participants at enrollment were 56 years of age, 54% were female, and 32% had completed college or a higher degree. Almost all participants (~95%) were white. All air pollution measures except IDTR were positively associated with at least one continuous measure of adiposity at enrollment. However, NO2 was negatively associated with BMI but positively associated with WHR at enrollment, and IDTR was also negatively associated with BMI. At follow-up (controlling for enrollment adiposity), we observed positive associations for PM2.5-10 with BMI, PM10 with BF%, and TI with BF% and BMI. Associations were similar for binary measures of adiposity, with minor differences for some pollutants. Associations of NOX, NO2, PM2.5absorbance, PM2.5 and PM10, with BMI at enrollment, but not at follow-up, were stronger among individuals with higher BMI polygenic risk scores (interaction p <0.05). In this large, prospective cohort, air pollution was associated with several measures of adiposity at enrollment and follow-up, and associations with adiposity at enrollment were modified by a polygenic risk score for obesity.

Project description:BackgroundAccurate obesity classification is important so that appropriate intervention can be instituted to modify metabolic risk factors. Commonly utilized body mass index (BMI) and percentage body fat (PBF) are influenced by lean mass whereas fat mass index (FMI) measures only body fat. This study compares the prevalence of obesity and metabolic risk factors with FMI, BMI and PBF using DXA (dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry).Methods489 women randomly recruited from the electoral roll were stratified into 4 age groups; 40-49, 50-59, 60-69 and 70-79 years from 2000 to 2001. Clinical data and DXA body composition were obtained. Statistical analyses were performed using Medcalc v15 (Ostend, Belgium) with significance level at p = 0.05 (two-tailed).ResultsThere was higher prevalence of obesity using PBF compared to BMI and FMI (p<0.001). This difference was greater from age 50-59 (p<0.05) which may be explained by age-related lean mass loss. PBF over-classified obesity in over 35% of normal and 95% of overweight categories compared to FMI and BMI. BMI has a sensitivity of 78.9% and specificity of 98.3% for obesity using FMI as the standard. BMI under-classified obesity in the overweight category by 14.9% compared to FMI. There was no difference in diabetes, dyslipidemia, hypertension and metabolic syndrome prevalence within the BMI-obesity and FMI-obesity categories (p>0.05).ConclusionPBF classified more obesity than BMI and FMI because of its low pre-determined threshold. The greater difference with PBF compared to BMI and FMI from the 50-59 decade onwards can be attributed to age-related lean mass loss. BMI had the lowest sensitivity for obesity diagnosis. BMI under-classified obesity in the overweight category compared to FMI due to its inability to differentiate lean mass. However, there was no significant difference in the prevalence of metabolic risk factors between BMI and FMI-obesity categories indicating that fat location may influence metabolic dysregulation.