Self-report versus objective measurement of weight history: implications for pre-treatment weight gain

Phimphasone-Brady, Phoutdavone; Dorflinger, Lindsey; Ruser, Christopher; Bullock, Anastasia J.; Godfrey, Kathryn; Hernandez, Dominica; Min, Kathryn M.; Masheb, Robin M.

doi:10.1007/s10865-019-00045-0

Cited by 10 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The limitations of this study include self-reporting of weight loss occurring prior to enrolment, which is subject to recall error and an underestimation of the association. Studies have reported that there may be variations between the measured weight and self-reported weight [ 35 , 36 ]. In addition, the participants were not asked about whether their weight loss was intentional or unintentional, which may have influenced the strength of the association.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Association of Weight Loss, Weight Status, and Abdominal Obesity with All-Cause Mortality in Older Adults

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The objectives of this study were to examine whether weight loss, weight status (based on body mass index [BMI] categories), and abdominal obesity (based on waist circumference [WC]) were associated with a 17-year mortality risk in community-dwelling older adults. Methods: Participants were 2,017 community-dwelling adults aged 65 years or above in the longitudinal Enquête de Santé Psychologique-Risques, Incidence et Traitement study. Self-reported weight loss was collected at baseline during face-to-face interviews. Bodyweight (kg), height (m), and WC (cm) were independently measured at the baseline. BMI was categorized as follows: underweight (BMI <18.5 kg/m2), normal weight (18.5–24.9 kg/m2), overweight (25–29.9 kg/m2), and obese (≥30 kg/m2). Abdominal obesity was defined by a WC of ≥102 cm in men and ≥88 cm in women. Adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine associations of weight loss, weight status, and abdominal obesity with all-cause mortality. Results: Over 17 years of follow-up (median 15.5 years), 812 participants died. Abdominal obesity compared to nonabdominal obesity was associated with a 49% increased mortality risk (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.22–1.83). However, being overweight (but not obese) was associated with a 20% decreased risk (95% CI: 0.66–0.97) compared to a normal BMI. Gender did not affect these associations. In the whole cohort, self-reported weight loss at baseline was not associated with an increased mortality risk after adjusting for health and lifestyle factors. However, in men, a baseline self-reported recent weight loss of >3 kg was associated with a 52% increase in mortality risk (95% CI: 1.05–2.18) in a fully adjusted model. Conclusion: In community-dwelling adults aged ≥65 years, abdominal obesity was strongly associated with increased mortality risk. Being overweight appeared, however, to be protective against mortality. Modest self-reported weight loss was not associated with all-cause mortality in community-dwelling older adults after adjusting for health and lifestyle factors. However, men reporting recent weight loss of more than 3 kg may be at increased risk. The findings of this study support the use of WC, rather than BMI, as a predictor of mortality risk in older adults.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Association of Weight Loss, Weight Status, and Abdominal Obesity with All-Cause Mortality in Older Adults

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While these differences may limit the generalizability of our findings to all OEF/OIF/OND‐era veterans, the magnitude of these differences was small and the response estimate similar to other veteran survey studies (Monteith et al, 2018). The accuracy of self‐reported height and weight was another potential limitation although there is support for use of this reporting method for group‐level data in veteran research (Phimphasone‐Brady et al, 2019). Finally, findings may not generalize to other diverse, underserved, or at‐risk eating disorder populations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

DSM‐5 eating disorder prevalence, gender differences, and mental health associations in United States military veterans

Masheb

Ramsey

Marsh

et al. 2021

Intl J Eating Disorders

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective Little is known about prevalence estimates of new and revised DSM‐5 eating disorders diagnoses in general, and especially among high‐risk, underserved and diverse eating disorder populations. The aim of the current study was to determine prevalence, gender differences and correlates of DSM‐5 eating disorders in veterans. Method Iraq and Afghanistan war era veterans (N = 1,121, 51.2% women) completed the Eating Disorder Diagnostic Scale‐5 and validated measures of eating pathology and mental health between July 2014 and September 2019. Results Overall more women than men (32.8% vs. 18.8%, p < .001) reported symptoms consistent with a DSM‐5 eating disorder. Prevalence estimates (women vs. men) for the specific diagnoses were: Anorexia Nervosa (AN; 0.0% vs. 0.0%), Bulimia Nervosa (BN; 6.1% vs. 3.5%), Binge‐Eating Disorder (BED; 4.4% vs. 2.9%), Atypical AN (AAN; 13.6% vs. 4.9%), Subclinical BN (0.0% vs. 0.2%), Subclinical BED (1.4% vs. 0.6%), Purging Disorder (2.1% vs. 0.7%), and Night Eating Syndrome (NES; 5.2% vs. 6.0%). Women were more likely to have BN or AAN, and there was no difference for BED or NES among genders. The eating disorder group had a higher mean BMI, and significantly greater eating pathology and mental health symptoms than the non‐eating disorder group. Discussion Approximately one‐third of women, and one‐fifth of men, reported symptoms consistent with a DSM‐5 eating disorder diagnosis. These high prevalence estimates across genders, and associated mental health concerns, suggest an urgent need to better understand and address eating disorders in military and veteran populations.

show abstract

“…Additionally, a full weight history (including periods of weight gain and dates of pregnancy) was not collected. Data were self‐report, although all self‐report measures are well‐validated and there is evidence for the accuracy of self‐reported weight in Veterans (Phimphasone‐Brady et al, 2019). Notably, participants were OEF/OIF/OND era Veterans meaning they are relatively newly retired from military service.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distinguishing probable atypical anorexia nervosa from weight loss alone in a national sample of U.S. Military Veterans: Disentangling the roles of weight suppression and cognitive concerns

Herb Neff,

Buta,

Fenn

et al. 2023

Intl J Eating Disorders

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveVeterans are at high risk for eating disorders (EDs), and specifically for atypical anorexia nervosa (atypical AN). The current study aimed to better understand this under‐studied disorder and how it differs from weight loss without ED cognitive features.MethodSecondary analyses were conducted with data from a national study of Veterans (N = 882, 49.4% women). Participants were categorized into four mutually exclusive groups using the Eating Disorder Diagnostic Scale 5: probable atypical AN, a cognitive concerns group (Cog Only), a weight suppressed group (WS Only), and a no ED control group. Adjusted regression models were used to compare groups on measures of eating pathology and mental health. Three weight suppression thresholds (5%, 10%, and 15%) for probable atypical AN were also tested.ResultsThe sample was comprised of 12% probable atypical AN, 23.6% Cog Only, 16.3% WS Only, and 48.1% Control. The probable atypical AN group was most like the Cog Only group except for higher levels of dietary restraint. Atypical AN fared worse and was least like the Control group followed by the WS Only group. All weight suppression thresholds significantly predicted dietary restraint, with 5% being the best predictor.DiscussionResults found that probable atypical AN is a distinct clinical entity and that the exact weight suppression threshold associated with atypical AN is less important than having any weight suppression. Findings highlight the clinical significance of atypical AN and the importance of gaining a better understanding of how to address this clinical entity.Public significanceAtypical anorexia nervosa is a relatively underexamined but highly prevalent eating disorder in the Veteran population. Results show that ED cognitive features are more closely linked to clinically significant eating pathology and poor mental health than weight suppression alone suggesting that negative thinking about weight gain and appearance, regardless of the presence or severity of weight loss, may signal the need for specialized intervention.

show abstract

Self-report versus objective measurement of weight history: implications for pre-treatment weight gain

Cited by 10 publications

References 25 publications

The Association of Weight Loss, Weight Status, and Abdominal Obesity with All-Cause Mortality in Older Adults

The Association of Weight Loss, Weight Status, and Abdominal Obesity with All-Cause Mortality in Older Adults

DSM‐5 eating disorder prevalence, gender differences, and mental health associations in United States military veterans

Distinguishing probable atypical anorexia nervosa from weight loss alone in a national sample of U.S. Military Veterans: Disentangling the roles of weight suppression and cognitive concerns

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About