Validity of self-reported body mass index among middle-aged participants in the Norwegian Women and Cancer study

Body mass index (BMI) based on self-reported height and weight has been criticized as being biased because of an observed tendency for overweight and obese people to overestimate height and underestimate weight, resulting in higher misclassification for these groups. We examined the validity of BMI...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Clinical epidemiology 2015-01, Vol.7 (default), p.313-323
Main Authors: Skeie, Guri, Mode, Nicolle, Henningsen, Maria, Borch, Kristin Benjaminsen
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Accuracy
Analysis
Body mass index
Cancer
Clinical medicine
Data collection
Education
Epidemiology
Health sciences: 800
Helsefag: 800
Marital status
Medical disciplines: 700
Medisinske Fag: 700
Middle age
Mortality
Norway
Obesity
Oncology, Experimental
Original Research
Population
Public health
Questionnaires
repeated measurements
Self report
Sociodemographics
Studies
Sunburn & sun tanning
Systematic review
Validity
VDP
women
Womens health
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c662t-ddb11e6f412d8c3a0182205d7c4be5e37a9b965e38cedaff8a6c840b36236e623
cites
container_end_page 323
container_issue default
container_start_page 313
container_title Clinical epidemiology
container_volume 7
creator Skeie, Guri
Mode, Nicolle
Henningsen, Maria
Borch, Kristin Benjaminsen
description Body mass index (BMI) based on self-reported height and weight has been criticized as being biased because of an observed tendency for overweight and obese people to overestimate height and underestimate weight, resulting in higher misclassification for these groups. We examined the validity of BMI based on self-reported values in a sample of Norwegian women aged 44-64 years. The study sample of 1,837 participants in the Norwegian Women and Cancer study self-reported height and weight, and then, within 1 year, either self-reported anthropometric again, or were measured by medical staff. Demographic and anthropometric were compared using t-tests and chi-square tests of independence. Misclassification of BMI categories was assessed by weighted Cohen's kappa and Bland-Altman plot. On average, the two measurements were taken 8 months apart, and self-reported weight increased by 0.6 kg (P
doi_str_mv 10.2147/CLEP.S83839
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_ea31751822754ba0ae501b6ffef5ea40</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A445606765</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_ea31751822754ba0ae501b6ffef5ea40</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A445606765</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c662t-ddb11e6f412d8c3a0182205d7c4be5e37a9b965e38cedaff8a6c840b36236e623</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkl2L1DAUhoso7rLulfcSEESQjk3TJu2NsAyrLgwq-HUZTpPTTpY26SatOv_edGe_RkwgOSRP3py8OUnynGarnBbi7Xpz_mX1tWIVqx8lx5SKOqWsqB8_iI-S0xAus9gYo0JkT5OjnFORCVodJ-MP6I020464lgTs29Tj6PyEmjRO78gAIRBjNf4hMDjbkcFo3WMKXSRG8JNRZgQ7LRCZtkg-Of8bOwOW_HQDWgJWkzVYhZ6Eada7Z8mTFvqApzfzSfL9_fm39cd08_nDxfpskyrO8ynVuqEUeVvQXFeKQUarPM9KLVTRYIlMQN3UPAaVQg1tWwFXVZE1jOeMYxxOkou9rnZwKUdvBvA76cDI6wXnO3mdfY8SIfpSLheIsmggAywz2vC2xbZEKLKo9W6vNc7NgFqhnTz0B6KHO9ZsZed-yaKoWS0WgRd7AeVNmIyV1nmQNP6IkBWtqgi8vrnBu6sZwyQHExT2PVh0c5CU15xHshYRffkPeulmb6OXMs_zglWc5vSe6iC-0NjWxcTUIirPiqLkGRe8jNTqP1TsGgejnMXWxPWDA68eHNgi9NM2uH6ejLPhEHxz-2IXgsf2zi2ayaVy5VK5cl-59_7sbbxjb-uU_QUWw-Y3</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2224386121</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Validity of self-reported body mass index among middle-aged participants in the Norwegian Women and Cancer study</title><source>Open Access: PubMed Central</source><source>Taylor &amp; Francis Open Access</source><source>NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives</source><source>Publicly Available Content Database</source><creator>Skeie, Guri ; Mode, Nicolle ; Henningsen, Maria ; Borch, Kristin Benjaminsen</creator><creatorcontrib>Skeie, Guri ; Mode, Nicolle ; Henningsen, Maria ; Borch, Kristin Benjaminsen</creatorcontrib><description>Body mass index (BMI) based on self-reported height and weight has been criticized as being biased because of an observed tendency for overweight and obese people to overestimate height and underestimate weight, resulting in higher misclassification for these groups. We examined the validity of BMI based on self-reported values in a sample of Norwegian women aged 44-64 years. The study sample of 1,837 participants in the Norwegian Women and Cancer study self-reported height and weight, and then, within 1 year, either self-reported anthropometric again, or were measured by medical staff. Demographic and anthropometric were compared using t-tests and chi-square tests of independence. Misclassification of BMI categories was assessed by weighted Cohen's kappa and Bland-Altman plot. On average, the two measurements were taken 8 months apart, and self-reported weight increased by 0.6 kg (P&lt;0.05), and BMI by 0.2 kg/m(2) (P&lt;0.05). The distribution of BMI categories did not differ between self-reported and measured values. There was substantial agreement between self-reported values and those measured by medical staff (weighted kappa 0.73). Under-reporting resulting in misclassification of BMI category was most common among overweight women (36%), but the highest proportion of extreme under-reporting was found in obese women (18% outside the 95% limits of agreement). The cumulative distribution curves for the measured and self-reported values closely followed each other, but measurements by medical staff were shifted slightly toward higher BMI values. While there was substantial agreement between self-reported and measured BMI values, there was small but statistically significant under-reporting of weight and thus self-reported BMI. The tendency to under-report was largest among overweight women, while the largest degree of under-reporting was found in the obese group. Self-reported weight and height provide a valid ranking of BMI for middle-aged Norwegian women.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1179-1349</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1179-1349</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2147/CLEP.S83839</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26170718</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New Zealand: Dove Medical Press Limited</publisher><subject>Accuracy ; Analysis ; Body mass index ; Cancer ; Clinical medicine ; Data collection ; Education ; Epidemiology ; Health sciences: 800 ; Helsefag: 800 ; Marital status ; Medical disciplines: 700 ; Medisinske Fag: 700 ; Middle age ; Mortality ; Norway ; Obesity ; Oncology, Experimental ; Original Research ; Population ; Public health ; Questionnaires ; repeated measurements ; Self report ; Sociodemographics ; Studies ; Sunburn &amp; sun tanning ; Systematic review ; Validity ; VDP ; women ; Womens health</subject><ispartof>Clinical epidemiology, 2015-01, Vol.7 (default), p.313-323</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2015 Dove Medical Press Limited</rights><rights>2015. This work is licensed under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess</rights><rights>2015 Skeie et al. This work is published by Dove Medical Press Limited, and licensed under Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c662t-ddb11e6f412d8c3a0182205d7c4be5e37a9b965e38cedaff8a6c840b36236e623</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2224386121/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2224386121?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,25753,26567,27924,27925,37012,37013,44590,53791,53793,74998</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26170718$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Skeie, Guri</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mode, Nicolle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Henningsen, Maria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Borch, Kristin Benjaminsen</creatorcontrib><title>Validity of self-reported body mass index among middle-aged participants in the Norwegian Women and Cancer study</title><title>Clinical epidemiology</title><addtitle>Clin Epidemiol</addtitle><description>Body mass index (BMI) based on self-reported height and weight has been criticized as being biased because of an observed tendency for overweight and obese people to overestimate height and underestimate weight, resulting in higher misclassification for these groups. We examined the validity of BMI based on self-reported values in a sample of Norwegian women aged 44-64 years. The study sample of 1,837 participants in the Norwegian Women and Cancer study self-reported height and weight, and then, within 1 year, either self-reported anthropometric again, or were measured by medical staff. Demographic and anthropometric were compared using t-tests and chi-square tests of independence. Misclassification of BMI categories was assessed by weighted Cohen's kappa and Bland-Altman plot. On average, the two measurements were taken 8 months apart, and self-reported weight increased by 0.6 kg (P&lt;0.05), and BMI by 0.2 kg/m(2) (P&lt;0.05). The distribution of BMI categories did not differ between self-reported and measured values. There was substantial agreement between self-reported values and those measured by medical staff (weighted kappa 0.73). Under-reporting resulting in misclassification of BMI category was most common among overweight women (36%), but the highest proportion of extreme under-reporting was found in obese women (18% outside the 95% limits of agreement). The cumulative distribution curves for the measured and self-reported values closely followed each other, but measurements by medical staff were shifted slightly toward higher BMI values. While there was substantial agreement between self-reported and measured BMI values, there was small but statistically significant under-reporting of weight and thus self-reported BMI. The tendency to under-report was largest among overweight women, while the largest degree of under-reporting was found in the obese group. Self-reported weight and height provide a valid ranking of BMI for middle-aged Norwegian women.</description><subject>Accuracy</subject><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>Body mass index</subject><subject>Cancer</subject><subject>Clinical medicine</subject><subject>Data collection</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Epidemiology</subject><subject>Health sciences: 800</subject><subject>Helsefag: 800</subject><subject>Marital status</subject><subject>Medical disciplines: 700</subject><subject>Medisinske Fag: 700</subject><subject>Middle age</subject><subject>Mortality</subject><subject>Norway</subject><subject>Obesity</subject><subject>Oncology, Experimental</subject><subject>Original Research</subject><subject>Population</subject><subject>Public health</subject><subject>Questionnaires</subject><subject>repeated measurements</subject><subject>Self report</subject><subject>Sociodemographics</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Sunburn &amp; sun tanning</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><subject>Validity</subject><subject>VDP</subject><subject>women</subject><subject>Womens health</subject><issn>1179-1349</issn><issn>1179-1349</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><sourceid>3HK</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNptkl2L1DAUhoso7rLulfcSEESQjk3TJu2NsAyrLgwq-HUZTpPTTpY26SatOv_edGe_RkwgOSRP3py8OUnynGarnBbi7Xpz_mX1tWIVqx8lx5SKOqWsqB8_iI-S0xAus9gYo0JkT5OjnFORCVodJ-MP6I020464lgTs29Tj6PyEmjRO78gAIRBjNf4hMDjbkcFo3WMKXSRG8JNRZgQ7LRCZtkg-Of8bOwOW_HQDWgJWkzVYhZ6Eada7Z8mTFvqApzfzSfL9_fm39cd08_nDxfpskyrO8ynVuqEUeVvQXFeKQUarPM9KLVTRYIlMQN3UPAaVQg1tWwFXVZE1jOeMYxxOkou9rnZwKUdvBvA76cDI6wXnO3mdfY8SIfpSLheIsmggAywz2vC2xbZEKLKo9W6vNc7NgFqhnTz0B6KHO9ZsZed-yaKoWS0WgRd7AeVNmIyV1nmQNP6IkBWtqgi8vrnBu6sZwyQHExT2PVh0c5CU15xHshYRffkPeulmb6OXMs_zglWc5vSe6iC-0NjWxcTUIirPiqLkGRe8jNTqP1TsGgejnMXWxPWDA68eHNgi9NM2uH6ejLPhEHxz-2IXgsf2zi2ayaVy5VK5cl-59_7sbbxjb-uU_QUWw-Y3</recordid><startdate>20150101</startdate><enddate>20150101</enddate><creator>Skeie, Guri</creator><creator>Mode, Nicolle</creator><creator>Henningsen, Maria</creator><creator>Borch, Kristin Benjaminsen</creator><general>Dove Medical Press Limited</general><general>Taylor &amp; Francis Ltd</general><general>Dove Medical Press Ltd</general><general>Dove Medical Press</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>3HK</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150101</creationdate><title>Validity of self-reported body mass index among middle-aged participants in the Norwegian Women and Cancer study</title><author>Skeie, Guri ; Mode, Nicolle ; Henningsen, Maria ; Borch, Kristin Benjaminsen</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c662t-ddb11e6f412d8c3a0182205d7c4be5e37a9b965e38cedaff8a6c840b36236e623</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Accuracy</topic><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>Body mass index</topic><topic>Cancer</topic><topic>Clinical medicine</topic><topic>Data collection</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Epidemiology</topic><topic>Health sciences: 800</topic><topic>Helsefag: 800</topic><topic>Marital status</topic><topic>Medical disciplines: 700</topic><topic>Medisinske Fag: 700</topic><topic>Middle age</topic><topic>Mortality</topic><topic>Norway</topic><topic>Obesity</topic><topic>Oncology, Experimental</topic><topic>Original Research</topic><topic>Population</topic><topic>Public health</topic><topic>Questionnaires</topic><topic>repeated measurements</topic><topic>Self report</topic><topic>Sociodemographics</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Sunburn &amp; sun tanning</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><topic>Validity</topic><topic>VDP</topic><topic>women</topic><topic>Womens health</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Skeie, Guri</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mode, Nicolle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Henningsen, Maria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Borch, Kristin Benjaminsen</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>Open Access: DOAJ - Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Clinical epidemiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Skeie, Guri</au><au>Mode, Nicolle</au><au>Henningsen, Maria</au><au>Borch, Kristin Benjaminsen</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Validity of self-reported body mass index among middle-aged participants in the Norwegian Women and Cancer study</atitle><jtitle>Clinical epidemiology</jtitle><addtitle>Clin Epidemiol</addtitle><date>2015-01-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>7</volume><issue>default</issue><spage>313</spage><epage>323</epage><pages>313-323</pages><issn>1179-1349</issn><eissn>1179-1349</eissn><abstract>Body mass index (BMI) based on self-reported height and weight has been criticized as being biased because of an observed tendency for overweight and obese people to overestimate height and underestimate weight, resulting in higher misclassification for these groups. We examined the validity of BMI based on self-reported values in a sample of Norwegian women aged 44-64 years. The study sample of 1,837 participants in the Norwegian Women and Cancer study self-reported height and weight, and then, within 1 year, either self-reported anthropometric again, or were measured by medical staff. Demographic and anthropometric were compared using t-tests and chi-square tests of independence. Misclassification of BMI categories was assessed by weighted Cohen's kappa and Bland-Altman plot. On average, the two measurements were taken 8 months apart, and self-reported weight increased by 0.6 kg (P&lt;0.05), and BMI by 0.2 kg/m(2) (P&lt;0.05). The distribution of BMI categories did not differ between self-reported and measured values. There was substantial agreement between self-reported values and those measured by medical staff (weighted kappa 0.73). Under-reporting resulting in misclassification of BMI category was most common among overweight women (36%), but the highest proportion of extreme under-reporting was found in obese women (18% outside the 95% limits of agreement). The cumulative distribution curves for the measured and self-reported values closely followed each other, but measurements by medical staff were shifted slightly toward higher BMI values. While there was substantial agreement between self-reported and measured BMI values, there was small but statistically significant under-reporting of weight and thus self-reported BMI. The tendency to under-report was largest among overweight women, while the largest degree of under-reporting was found in the obese group. Self-reported weight and height provide a valid ranking of BMI for middle-aged Norwegian women.</abstract><cop>New Zealand</cop><pub>Dove Medical Press Limited</pub><pmid>26170718</pmid><doi>10.2147/CLEP.S83839</doi><tpages>11</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1179-1349
ispartof Clinical epidemiology, 2015-01, Vol.7 (default), p.313-323
issn 1179-1349
1179-1349
language eng
recordid cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_ea31751822754ba0ae501b6ffef5ea40
source Open Access: PubMed Central; Taylor & Francis Open Access; NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives; Publicly Available Content Database
subjects Accuracy
Analysis
Body mass index
Cancer
Clinical medicine
Data collection
Education
Epidemiology
Health sciences: 800
Helsefag: 800
Marital status
Medical disciplines: 700
Medisinske Fag: 700
Middle age
Mortality
Norway
Obesity
Oncology, Experimental
Original Research
Population
Public health
Questionnaires
repeated measurements
Self report
Sociodemographics
Studies
Sunburn & sun tanning
Systematic review
Validity
VDP
women
Womens health
title Validity of self-reported body mass index among middle-aged participants in the Norwegian Women and Cancer study
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T02%3A58%3A18IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Validity%20of%20self-reported%20body%20mass%20index%20among%20middle-aged%20participants%20in%20the%20Norwegian%20Women%20and%20Cancer%20study&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20epidemiology&rft.au=Skeie,%20Guri&rft.date=2015-01-01&rft.volume=7&rft.issue=default&rft.spage=313&rft.epage=323&rft.pages=313-323&rft.issn=1179-1349&rft.eissn=1179-1349&rft_id=info:doi/10.2147/CLEP.S83839&rft_dat=%3Cgale_doaj_%3EA445606765%3C/gale_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c662t-ddb11e6f412d8c3a0182205d7c4be5e37a9b965e38cedaff8a6c840b36236e623%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2224386121&rft_id=info:pmid/26170718&rft_galeid=A445606765&rfr_iscdi=true