Validity of self-reported height and weight in 4808 EPIC-Oxford participants

Objective: To assess the validity of self-reported height and weight by comparison with measured height and weight in a sample of middle-aged men and women, and to determine the extent of misclassification of body mass index (BMI) arising from differences between self-reported and measured values. D...

Full beskrivning

Bibliografiska uppgifter
Huvudupphovsmän: Spencer, E, Appleby, P, Davey, G, Key, T
Övriga upphovsmän: Nutrition Society
Materialtyp: Journal article
Språk:English
Publicerad: Cambridge University Press 2002
Ämnen:
_version_ 1826263466236706816
author Spencer, E
Appleby, P
Davey, G
Key, T
author2 Nutrition Society
author_facet Nutrition Society
Spencer, E
Appleby, P
Davey, G
Key, T
author_sort Spencer, E
collection OXFORD
description Objective: To assess the validity of self-reported height and weight by comparison with measured height and weight in a sample of middle-aged men and women, and to determine the extent of misclassification of body mass index (BMI) arising from differences between self-reported and measured values. Design: Analysis of self-reported and measured height and weight data from participants in the Oxford cohort of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC-Oxford). Subjects: Four thousand eigh hundred and eight British men and women aged 35-76 years. Results: Speaman rank correlations between self-reported and measured height, weight and BMI were high (r>0.9, P<0.0001). Height was overestimated by a mean of 1.23 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11-1.34) cm in men and 0.60 (0.51-0.70) cm in women; the extent of overestimation was greater in older men and women, shorter men and heavier women. Weight was underestimated by a mean of 1.85 (1.72-1.99) kg in men and 1.40 (1.31-1.49) kg in women; the extent of underestimation was greater in heavier men and women, but did not vary with age or height. Using standard categories of BMI, 22.4% of men and 18.0% of women were classified incorrectly based on self-reported height and weight. After correcting the self-reported values using predictive equations derived from a 10% sample of subjects, misclassification decreased to 15.2% in men and 13.8% in women. Conclusions: Self-reported height and weight data are valid for identifying relationships in epidemiological studies. In analyses where anthropometric factors are the primary variables of interest, measurements in a representative sample of the study population can be used to improve the accuracy of estimates of height, weight and BMI.
first_indexed 2024-03-06T19:52:13Z
format Journal article
id oxford-uuid:2454d22b-8cf7-4c21-8af1-25d39a37378d
institution University of Oxford
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-06T19:52:13Z
publishDate 2002
publisher Cambridge University Press
record_format dspace
spelling oxford-uuid:2454d22b-8cf7-4c21-8af1-25d39a37378d2022-03-26T11:49:28ZValidity of self-reported height and weight in 4808 EPIC-Oxford participantsJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:2454d22b-8cf7-4c21-8af1-25d39a37378dPublic HealthEnglishOxford University Research Archive - ValetCambridge University Press2002Spencer, EAppleby, PDavey, GKey, TNutrition SocietyObjective: To assess the validity of self-reported height and weight by comparison with measured height and weight in a sample of middle-aged men and women, and to determine the extent of misclassification of body mass index (BMI) arising from differences between self-reported and measured values. Design: Analysis of self-reported and measured height and weight data from participants in the Oxford cohort of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC-Oxford). Subjects: Four thousand eigh hundred and eight British men and women aged 35-76 years. Results: Speaman rank correlations between self-reported and measured height, weight and BMI were high (r>0.9, P<0.0001). Height was overestimated by a mean of 1.23 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11-1.34) cm in men and 0.60 (0.51-0.70) cm in women; the extent of overestimation was greater in older men and women, shorter men and heavier women. Weight was underestimated by a mean of 1.85 (1.72-1.99) kg in men and 1.40 (1.31-1.49) kg in women; the extent of underestimation was greater in heavier men and women, but did not vary with age or height. Using standard categories of BMI, 22.4% of men and 18.0% of women were classified incorrectly based on self-reported height and weight. After correcting the self-reported values using predictive equations derived from a 10% sample of subjects, misclassification decreased to 15.2% in men and 13.8% in women. Conclusions: Self-reported height and weight data are valid for identifying relationships in epidemiological studies. In analyses where anthropometric factors are the primary variables of interest, measurements in a representative sample of the study population can be used to improve the accuracy of estimates of height, weight and BMI.
spellingShingle Public Health
Spencer, E
Appleby, P
Davey, G
Key, T
Validity of self-reported height and weight in 4808 EPIC-Oxford participants
title Validity of self-reported height and weight in 4808 EPIC-Oxford participants
title_full Validity of self-reported height and weight in 4808 EPIC-Oxford participants
title_fullStr Validity of self-reported height and weight in 4808 EPIC-Oxford participants
title_full_unstemmed Validity of self-reported height and weight in 4808 EPIC-Oxford participants
title_short Validity of self-reported height and weight in 4808 EPIC-Oxford participants
title_sort validity of self reported height and weight in 4808 epic oxford participants
topic Public Health
work_keys_str_mv AT spencere validityofselfreportedheightandweightin4808epicoxfordparticipants
AT applebyp validityofselfreportedheightandweightin4808epicoxfordparticipants
AT daveyg validityofselfreportedheightandweightin4808epicoxfordparticipants
AT keyt validityofselfreportedheightandweightin4808epicoxfordparticipants