The validity of self-reported weight in US adults: a population based cross-sectional study

Elmer Villanueva

336 citations0/0 files storedBMC Public Health

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Survey Methodology and Nonresponse Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet Statistical Methods in Epidemiology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Investigating the validity of the self-reported values of weight allows for the proper assessment of studies using questionnaire-derived data. The study examined the accuracy of gender-specific self-reported weight in a sample of adults. The effects of age, education, race and ethnicity, income, general health and medical status on the degree of discrepancy (the difference between self-reported weight and measured weight) are similarly considered. METHODS: The analysis used data from the US Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Self-reported and measured weights were abstracted and analyzed according to sex, age, measured weight, self-reported weight, and body mass index (BMI). A proportional odds model was applied. RESULTS: The weight discrepancy was positively associated with age, and negatively associated with measured weight and BMI. Ordered logistic regression modeling showed age, race-ethnicity, education, and BMI to be associated with the degree of discrepancy in both sexes. In men, additional predictors were consumption of more than 100 cigarettes and the desire to change weight. In women, marital status, income, activity level, and the number of months since the last doctor's visit were important. CONCLUSIONS: Predictors of the degree of weight discrepancy are gender-specific, and require careful consideration when examined.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 336 citations exist upstream.

References

2001Effects of Age on Validity of Self-Reported Height, Weight, and Body Mass Index 1994Plan and operation of the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988-94. Series 1: programs and collection procedures.1982COMPARISON OF SELF-REPORTED AND MEASURED HEIGHT AND WEIGHT

Cited by

2009Validity of self-reported height, weight, and body mass index: findings from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2001-2006.2013Validity of Web-Based Self-Reported Weight and Height: Results of the Nutrinet-Santé Study 2006How valid are self‐reported height and weight? A comparison between CATI self‐report and clinic measurements using a large cohort study 2004Moving to Opportunity and Tranquility: Neighborhood Effects on Adult Economic Self-Sufficiency and Health from a Randomized Housing Voucher Experiment 2010Accuracy of body mass index estimated from self‐reported height and weight in mid‐aged Australian women 2004Immigration and Acculturation in Relation to Health and Health-Related Risk Factors Among Specific Asian Subgroups in a Health Maintenance Organization 2008Comparing the SF-12 and SF-36 health status questionnaires in patients with and without obesity 2008Development and validation of a new figural drawing scale for body‐image assessment: the BIAS‐BD

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.