2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.ehb.2007.04.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of self-reported and measured height and weight: Implications for obesity research among young adults

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
81
2
9

Year Published

2010
2010
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 112 publications
(97 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
5
81
2
9
Order By: Relevance
“…However, as in those other studies, our information on weight and height was self-reported. Self-reported height and weight are considered feasible and useful measures in large-scale studies (35) , although overestimation of self-reported height and underestimation of self-reported weight have been documented in individuals of both genders (36) . This information is particularly crucial for researchers who evaluate the effects of BMI based on self-reported height and weight.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, as in those other studies, our information on weight and height was self-reported. Self-reported height and weight are considered feasible and useful measures in large-scale studies (35) , although overestimation of self-reported height and underestimation of self-reported weight have been documented in individuals of both genders (36) . This information is particularly crucial for researchers who evaluate the effects of BMI based on self-reported height and weight.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…3 See Danubio et al (2008) for a survey of bias magnitudes for OECD countries. 4 The exceptions are a number of regional surveys covering their Having merged the two samples using the identification number and having removed the data relating to subjects aged below 15 and above 65, we ended up with a sample comprising 1568 observations (49.7% men and 50.3% women) for whom we had both self-reported and measured anthropometric data together with socioeconomic and health information.…”
Section: Data Descriptionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In line with the discussion above and the literature on the determinants of weight and height self-reporting biases, our econometric specification contains the following set of covariates (Table 2) (2000), Gillum and Sempos (2005) and 11 Note that crucial to our analysis is the fact that at the time of the home interview individuals report their weight and height without knowing that they might be invited to participate in an examination survey during which some measurements will be taken. Danubio et al (2008) we include an individual's characteristics such as gender, age and age squared, marital status and ethnicity/nationality. (ii) To control for differences attributable to knowledge or education, we enter dichotomous variables for different levels of educational attainment.…”
Section: Background and Misreporting Determinantsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…None of these risk factors require the participants to have previously attended a GP. Though people may misreport their weight and height [20,21], resulting in underreporting of obesity levels, over 40% of participants in our study reported that they had a BMI of 25kg/m 2 or more, suggesting that people are willing to report this as a risk factor [11]. Only screening those aged 40 years or more with either a family history of diabetes or self reported BMI of 25kg/m 2 or more would have halved the number of tests carried out, and identified around two thirds of those who were diagnosed with hyperglycaemia following participation in the study.…”
Section: Cost Of Different Screening Strategiesmentioning
confidence: 99%