Self-reported weight and height are valid measures to determine weight status: results from the Brazilian National Health Survey (PNS 2013)

Abstract

Self-reported measures have been used to obtain weight and height information in some epidemiological surveys. The validation of such information is necessary to guarantee data quality. This study assessed the validity of self-reported weight and height to determine weight status. Data were obtained in the Brazilian National Health Survey, a Brazilian household-based nationwide survey carried out in 2013. In this survey, 40,366 individuals (aged ≥ 18 years) provided self-reported and measured information about weight and height. Student's paired t-test was used to verify the differences between self-reported and measured data. The agreement between measurements was obtained using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman method. To evaluate variations in weight status categorizations, the weighted kappa coefficient and exact agreement were used. Sensitivity and specificity were estimated for the self-reported information to classify overweight and obese individuals. There was high agreement between self-reported and measured weight, height, and body mass index (ICC > 0.88). The mean agreements estimated by the Bland-Altman method were 99.6% for weight and 100.6% for height. The weighted kappa coefficient showed substantial agreement among the weight status categories (> 0.66); the exact agreement was 77%. Sensibility and specificity for overweight (83% and 87.5%, respectively) and obesity (73.4% and 96.7%, respectively) were considered high for the sociodemographic characteristics evaluated. According to our results, self-reported measurements of weight and height can be used cautiously as valid alternatives to determine weight status.

Accuracy of self-reported height, weight and waist circumference in rural poor areas of China

“…Consistent with the previous studies, people tend to over-report their height [1,2,7,9,12,13,32] and height was over-reported 0.67 cm in this study. The majority of subgroups had a statistical difference.…”

“…The majority of subgroups had a statistical difference. Mostly studies also showed people tend to over-report their weight [1,2,7,9,12,13,32]. However, the difference of self-reported and measured weight approach zero in this study, and this phenomenon exist in nearly all of the subgroups.…”

The burden of non-communicable diseases attributable to high BMI in Brazil, 1990–2017: findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study

“…On the other hand, GBD methodology corrected the bias in selfreported data, using measured data for each age, sex, and geographic region, as previously described [17]. High agreement between measured and self-reported anthropometric data was demonstrated, using several statistical methods across sex, age group, education level, and household location categories, which reinforces their use as proxies of measured values in the Brazilian population ≥ 18 years old [47]. Moreover, GBD methodology and estimates have been used worldwide and approved as valid in several countries.…”

Az önbevalláson alapuló testtömegindex használatának tapasztalatai: OTÁP adatok elemzése

“…A nők körében általában nagyobb a testsúly alulbecslésének mértéke, mint a férfiaknál (Akhtar-Danesh et al, 2008;Moreira et al, 2018;Taylor et al, 2006;Connor Gorber et al, 2007;Kuczmarski et al, 2001;John et al, 2006). A férfiak ugyanakkor a testmagasságukat hajlamosabbak felülbecsülni (Anai et al, 2015;Domingues et al, 2011).…”