Effects of body size and sociodemographic characteristics on differences between self-reported and measured anthropometric data in middle-aged men and women: the EPIC-Norfolk study (original) (raw)

Abstract

Background/Objectives:

To investigate the effects of body size and sociodemographic characteristics on differences between self-reported (SR) and measured anthropometric data in men and women.

Subjects/Methods:

This study comprises 9933 men and 11 856 women aged 39–79 years at baseline survey (1993–1997) in the EPIC-Norfolk study (Norfolk arm of the European Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition Study). The effects of sex, measured height, weight, age group, educational level and social class on differences between SR and measured weight, height, body mass index (BMI), waist, hip and waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) were examined.

Results:

There were systematic differences between SR and measured anthropometric measurements by sex, measured height, weight and sociodemographic characteristics. Height was overestimated in both sexes while weight, waist, hip, and consequently, BMI and WHR were underestimated. Being male, shorter, heavier, older, and having no educational qualifications and manual occupation were independently associated with overreporting of height, and underreporting of weight was associated independently with being female, shorter, heavier, younger age, and higher education level and social class. Underreporting of waist circumference was strongly associated with being female and higher measured waist circumference, while underreporting of hip circumference was associated with being male and higher measured hip circumference. Furthermore, there was substantial degree of misclassification of BMI and waist circumference categories for both general and central obesity associated with SR data.

Conclusions:

These findings suggest that errors in SR anthropometric data, especially waist and hip circumference are influenced by actual body size as well as sociodemographic characteristics. These systematic differences may influence associations between SR anthropometric measures and health outcomes in epidemiological studies.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 12 print issues and online access

$259.00 per year

only $21.58 per issue

Buy this article

• Purchase on SpringerLink
• Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Additional access options:

• Log in
• Learn about institutional subscriptions
• Read our FAQs
• Contact customer support

Similar content being viewed by others

References

• Alberti KGM, Zimmet P, Shaw J (2005). The metabolic syndrome—a new worldwide definition. Lancet 366, 1059–1062.
  Article Google Scholar
• Bolton-Smith C, Woodward M, Tunstall-Pedoe H, Morrison C (2000). Accuracy of the estimated prevalence of obesity from self reported height and weight in an adult Scottish population. J Epidemiol Community Health 54, 143–148.
  Article CAS Google Scholar
• Cohen J (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas 20, 37–46.
  Article Google Scholar
• Cullum A, McCarthy A, Gunnell D, Davey Smith G, Sterne JAC, Ben-Shlomo Y (2003). Dietary restraint and the mis-reporting of anthropometric measures by middle-aged adults. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 28, 426–433.
  Article Google Scholar
• Day NE, Oakes S, Luben R, Khaw KT, Bingham S, Welch A et al. (1999). EPIC-Norfolk: study design and characteristics of the cohort. European Prospective Investigation of Cancer. Br J Cancer 80 (Suppl 1), 95–103.
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Dekkers J, van Wier M, Hendriksen I, Twisk J, van Mechelen W (2008). Accuracy of self-reported body weight, height and waist circumference in a Dutch overweight working population. BMC Med Res Method 8, 69.
  Article Google Scholar
• Elias P, Halstead K, Prandy K (1993). CASOC: Computer-Assisted Standard Occupational Coding. HMSO: London.
  Google Scholar
• Flegal KM, Graubard BI, Williamson DF, Gail MH (2005). Excess deaths associated with underweight, overweight, and obesity. JAMA 293, 1861–1867.
  Article CAS Google Scholar
• Gorber SC, Tremblay M, Moher D, Gorber B (2007). A comparison of direct vs self-report measures for assessing height, weight and body mass index: a systematic review. Obes Rev 8, 307–326.
  Article Google Scholar
• Greenberg BS, Eastin M, Hofschire L, Lachlan K, Brownell KD (2003). Portrayals of overweight and obese individuals on commercial television. Am J Public Health 93, 1342–1348.
  Article Google Scholar
• Gunnell D, Berney L, Holland P, Maynard M, Blane D, Davey Smith G et al. (2004). Does the misreporting of adult body size depend upon an individual's height and weight? Methodological debate. Int J Epidemiol 33, 1398–1399.
  Article Google Scholar
• Gunnell D, Berney L, Holland P, Maynard M, Blane D, Frankel S et al. (2000). How accurately are height, weight and leg length reported by the elderly, and how closely are they related to measurements recorded in childhood? Int J Epidemiol 29, 456–464.
  Article CAS Google Scholar
• Han TS, Lean ME (1998). Self-reported waist circumference compared with the ‘Waist Watcher’ tape-measure to identify individuals at increased health risk through intra-abdominal fat accumulation. Br J Nutr 80, 81–88.
  Article CAS Google Scholar
• Huxley R, Mendis S, Zheleznyakov E, Reddy S, Chan J (2010). Body mass index, waist circumference and waist:hip ratio as predictors of cardiovascular risk-a review of the literature. Eur J Clin Nutr 64, 16–22.
  Article CAS Google Scholar
• Khaw KT, Wareham N, Bingham S, Welch A, Luben R, Day N (2008). Combined impact of health behaviours and mortality in men and women: the EPIC-Norfolk prospective population study. PLoS Med 5, e12.
  Article Google Scholar
• Kuczmarski MF, Kuczmarski RJ, Najjar M (2001). Effects of age on validity of self-reported height, weight, and body mass index: findings from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988–1994. J Am Diet Assoc 101, 28–34.
  Article CAS Google Scholar
• Kushi LH, KAYE SA, Folsom AR, SOLER JT, Prineas RJ (1988). Accuracy and reliability of self-measurement of body girths. Am J Epidemiol 128, 740–748.
  Article CAS Google Scholar
• Nishida C, Ko GT, Kumanyika S (2009). Body fat distribution and noncommunicable diseases in populations: overview of the 2008 WHO Expert Consultation on Waist Circumference and Waist-Hip Ratio. Eur J Clin Nutr 64, 2–5.
  Article Google Scholar
• Pischon T, Boeing H, Hoffmann K, Bergmann M, Schulze MB, Overvad K et al. (2008). General and abdominal adiposity and risk of Death in Europe. N Engl J Med 359, 2105–2120.
  Article CAS Google Scholar
• Pischon T, Lahmann PH, Boeing H, Friedenreich C, Norat T, Tjonneland A et al. (2006). Body size and risk of colon and rectal cancer in the european prospective investigation into cancer and nutrition (EPIC). J Natl Cancer Inst 98, 920–931.
  Article Google Scholar
• Riboli E, Kaaks R (1997). The EPIC Project: rationale and study design. European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition. Int J Epidemiol 26, S6–S14.
  Article Google Scholar
• Sanchez-Vaznaugh EV, Kawachi I, Subramanian SV, Sanchez BN, Acevedo-Garcia D (2009). Do socioeconomic gradients in body ass index vary by race/ethnicity, gender, and birthplace? Am J Epidemiol 169, 1102–1112.
  Article Google Scholar
• Shohaimi S, Luben R, Wareham N, Day N, Bingham S, Welch A et al. (2003). Residential area deprivation predicts smoking habit independently of individual educational level and occupational social class. A cross sectional study in the Norfolk cohort of the European Investigation into Cancer (EPIC-Norfolk). J Epidemiol Community Health 57, 270–276.
  Article CAS Google Scholar
• Snijder MB, van Dam RM, Visser M, Seidell JC (2006). What aspects of body fat are particularly hazardous and how do we measure them? Int J Epidemiol 35, 83–92.
  Article CAS Google Scholar
• Sobal J (2002). Social and cultural influences on obesity. In: Bjorntorp P, Sobal S (eds). International Textbook of Obesity. John Wiley & Sons Ltd: Chichester, UK.
  Google Scholar
• Spencer EA, Appleby PN, Davey GK, Key TJ (2002). Validity of self-reported height and weight in 4808 EPIC-Oxford participants. Public Health Nutr 5, 561–565.
  Article Google Scholar
• Spencer EA, Roddam AW, Key TJ (2004). Accuracy of self-reported waist and hip measurements in 4492 EPIC-Oxford participants. Public Health Nutr 7, 723–727.
  Article Google Scholar
• Stewart AL (1982). The reliability and validity of self-reported weight and height. J Chronic Dis 35, 295–309.
  Article CAS Google Scholar
• Stommel M, Schoenborn C (2009). Accuracy and usefulness of BMI measures based on self-reported weight and height: findings from the NHANES & NHIS 2001–2006. BMC Public Health 9, 421.
  Article Google Scholar
• Vazquez G, Duval S, Jacobs Jr DR, Silventoinen K (2007). Comparison of body mass index, waist circumference, and waist/hip ratio in predicting incident diabetes: a meta-analysis. Epidemiol Rev 29, 115–128.
  Article Google Scholar
• Villanueva E (2001). The validity of self-reported weight in US adults: a population based cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health 1, 11.
  Article CAS Google Scholar
• Visscher TLS, Viet AL, Kroesbergen IHT, Seidell JC (2006). Underreporting of BMI in adults and its effect on obesity prevalence estimations in the period 1998–2001[ast]. Obesity 14, 2054–2063.
  Article Google Scholar
• Wada K, Tamakoshi K, Tsunekawa T, Otsuka R, Zhang H, Murata C et al. (2005). Validity of self-reported height and weight in a Japanese workplace population. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 29, 1093–1099.
  Article CAS Google Scholar
• WHO. Global Database on Body Mass Index: BMI Classification. http://apps.who.int/bmi/index.jsp (accessed 25 February 2010).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The EPIC-Norfolk cohort is supported by grant funding from Cancer Research UK and the Medical Research Council.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

1. Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
   J Y Park, R N Luben & K-T Khaw
2. Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Medical Research Council Centre for Nutritional Epidemiology in Cancer Prevention and Survival, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
   P N Mitrou & R H Keogh
3. Medical Research Council Biostatistics Unit, Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
   R H Keogh
4. Medical Research Council Epidemiology Unit, Institute of Metabolic Science, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK
   N J Wareham

Authors

1. J Y Park
2. P N Mitrou
3. R H Keogh
4. R N Luben
5. N J Wareham
6. K-T Khaw

Corresponding author

Correspondence toK-T Khaw.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Park, J., Mitrou, P., Keogh, R. et al. Effects of body size and sociodemographic characteristics on differences between self-reported and measured anthropometric data in middle-aged men and women: the EPIC-Norfolk study.Eur J Clin Nutr 65, 357–367 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1038/ejcn.2010.259

Download citation

• Received: 10 March 2010
• Revised: 18 October 2010
• Accepted: 28 October 2010
• Published: 22 December 2010
• Issue date: March 2011
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ejcn.2010.259

Keywords

This article is cited by