Validity of self-measured waist circumference in adults at risk of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease

Ayala, Ana María Contardo; Nijpels, Giel; Lakerveld, Jeroen

doi:10.1186/preaccept-6850939411325425

Cited by 9 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, studies reporting LOA or SD of mean waist circumference differences thereby permitting LOA calculation, the lower limits ranged from −21.01 to −3.19 cm and the upper range spanned 1.46 to 15.42 cm, or an absolute difference of 4.65 to 33.32 cm. The upper and lower LOA and absolute difference for waist circumference in this study also are well within the values reported by others [ 7 , 10 , 34 , 35 , 37 , 38 , 41 – 44 , 49 , 69 ]. A similar comparison of mean differences in self-reported hip circumferences published by others [ 7 , 33 , 35 , 38 – 41 , 43 , 44 , 69 , 70 ] (mean difference range = −5.90 to 1.19 cm; lower LOA range = −26.09 to −2.29 cm; upper LOA range 1.60 to 14.29 cm; absolute difference of LOA = 6.97 to 40.38 cm) to findings in this study indicate comparable results (mean difference = 1.07 cm, LOA = −10.36 to 9.35 cm; absolute difference 19.71 cm).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…Although creating the tape measure does place some participant burden (e.g., they need to have the appropriate resources, including a computer, Internet, printer, tape), participants in this study reported the tape measure was ease to assemble and did not report any problems. This study is among the few of its type to report confidence intervals for waist, hip, and neck circumferences differences and limits of agreement [ 34 , 43 , 44 ]. Importantly, this study provides the recommended reporting data for Bland-Altman analysis of agreement between measurements taken by technicians vs self.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reliability and criterion validity of self-measured waist, hip, and neck circumferences

Barrios

Martin‐Biggers

Quick

et al. 2016

BMC Med Res Methodol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundWaist, hip, and neck circumference measurements are cost-effective, non-invasive, useful markers for body fat distribution and disease risk. For epidemiology and intervention studies, including body circumference measurements in self-report surveys could be informative. However, few studies have assessed the test-retest reliability and criterion validity of a self-report tool feasible for use in large scale studies.MethodsAt home, mothers of young children viewed a brief, online instructional video on how to measure their waist, hip, and neck circumferences. Afterwards, they created a homemade paper measuring tape from a downloaded file with scissors and tape, took all measurements in duplicate, and entered them into an online survey. A few weeks later, participants visited an anthropometrics lab where they measured themselves again, and trained technicians (n = 9) measured participants in duplicate using standard equipment and procedures. To assess differences between self- and technician-measured circumferences, duplicate measurements for participant home self-measurements, participant lab self-measurements, and technician measurements each were averaged and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests conducted. Agreement between all possible pairs of measurements were examined using Intraclass Correlations (ICCs) and Bland-Altman plots.ResultsParticipants (n = 41; aged 38.05 ± 3.54SD years; 71 % white) were all mothers that had at least one child under the age of 12 yrs. Technical error of measurements for self- and technician- duplicate measurements varied little (0.08 to 0.76 inches) and had very high reliability (≥0.90). Intraclass Correlations (ICC) comparing self vs technician were high (0.97, 0.96, and 0.84 for waist, hip, and neck). Comparison of self-measurements at home vs lab revealed high test-retest reliability (ICC ≥ 0.87). Differences between participant self- and technician measurements were small (i.e., mean difference ranged from −0.13 to 0.06 inches) with nearly all (≥93 %) differences within Bland-Altman limits of agreement and <10 % exceeding the a priori clinically meaningful difference criterion.ConclusionsThis study has demonstrated a simple, inexpensive method for teaching novice mothers of young children to take their own body circumferences resulting in accurate, reliable data. Thus, collecting self-measured and self-reported circumference data in future studies may be a feasible approach in research protocols that has potential to expand our knowledge of body composition beyond that provided by self-reported body mass indexes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability and criterion validity of self-measured waist, hip, and neck circumferences

Barrios

Martin‐Biggers

Quick

et al. 2016

BMC Med Res Methodol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus far, few studies have validated self-measured WC against nurse-measured WC. Results have been conflicting as studies have reported either systematic over- (44) or underrating (45) of self-measurements compared with nurse-measured values. A Dutch study (with fairly similar population characteristics to ours) found that the participants' self-measurement overrated WC averagely by 6 cm compared with nursemeasurement (44) .…”

Section: Self-reported and -Measured Anthropometrics Reached High Agrmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Results have been conflicting as studies have reported either systematic over- (44) or underrating (45) of self-measurements compared with nurse-measured values. A Dutch study (with fairly similar population characteristics to ours) found that the participants' self-measurement overrated WC averagely by 6 cm compared with nursemeasurement (44) . In contrast, the largest validation study published so far that concerned the Norfolk cohort of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) observed significant underestimation of self-reported WC compared with the measured values (mean difference 4-6 cm) (40) .…”

Section: Self-reported and -Measured Anthropometrics Reached High Agrmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adherence to the healthy Nordic diet is associated with weight change during 7 years of follow-up

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies indicate that the healthy Nordic diet may improve heart health, but its relation to weight change is less clear. We studied the association between the adherence to the healthy Nordic diet and long-term changes in weight, BMI and waist circumference. Furthermore, the agreement between self-reported and measured body anthropometrics was examined. The population-based DIetary, Lifestyle and Genetic Determinants of Obesity and Metabolic syndrome Study in 2007 included 5024 Finns aged 25-75 years. The follow-up was conducted in 2014 (n 3735). One-third of the participants were invited to a health examination. The rest were sent measuring tape and written instructions along with questionnaires. The Baltic Sea Diet Score (BSDS) was used to measure adherence to the healthy Nordic diet. Association of the baseline BSDS and changes in BSDS during the follow-up with changes in body anthropometrics were examined using linear regression analysis. The agreement between self-reported and nurse-measured anthropometrics was determined with Bland-Altman analysis. Intra-class correlation coefficients between self-reported and nurse-measured anthropometrics exceeded 0·95. The baseline BSDS associated with lower weight (β=-0·056, P=0·043) and BMI (β=-0·021, P=0·031) over the follow-up. This association was especially evident among those who had increased their BSDS. In conclusion, both high initial and improved adherence to the healthy Nordic diet may promote long-term weight maintenance. The self-reported/measured anthropometrics were shown to have high agreement with nurse-measured values which adds the credibility of our results.

show abstract

“…Participants will be required to report their height and weight and they will measure their waist and hip circumference. We will send the participants a measuring tape and instructions by post (Ayala et al, 2014). The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) will be used to assess the subjective sleep quality of the participants (Buysse et al, 1989).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Protective and Harmful Effects of Physical Activity for Low Back Pain: A Protocol for the AUstralian Twin BACK Pain (AUTBACK) Feasibility Study

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Low back pain (LBP) is a major health problem globally, but approaches to prevention are not yet clearly identified because modifiable risk factors are not well established. Although physical activity is one promising modifiable risk factor, it is still not known what types and doses of physical activity are protective or harmful for LBP. The aim of this study is to establish the feasibility of a definitive cohort study that will investigate the effects of different types and doses of physical activity on the risk of developing recurrent LBP while accounting for genetic factors. This will be a pilot longitudinal twin study and twins will be recruited from the Australian Twin Registry, and will be followed over 1 year. Thirty adult complete twin pairs with a history of LBP, but symptom free at recruitment, will be included. Data on physical activity (predictor) will be collected using four questionnaires and an objective measure (accelerometer) at baseline and at 6-month follow-up. Twins will also complete an additional physical activity questionnaire monthly. Data on LBP (outcome) will be collected at baseline and weekly. Data will be collected using short message service (SMS) and email. We will keep records of the recruitment rate, follow-up rate, and completeness of data. Barriers to completing the study will be investigated. The results of this study will inform the design and implementation of a future definitive study, which will help to clarify the effects of different types and doses of physical activity on the risk of developing recurrent LBP.Keywords: low back pain, physical activity, twin study, longitudinal study, risk factorsThe latest Global Burden of Diseases Study ranked low back pain (LBP) as the highest contributor to disability globally, expressed as years of life lived with disability (YLD; Global Burden of Disease Study, 2015). LBP is also a costly condition, with total treatment costs estimated at $4.8 billion a year in Australia (Arthritis and Osteoporosis Victoria, 2013). Implementing preventive strategies for LBP would be a logical method to reduce the burden of this condition on people's lives and on society.Although many preventive strategies for LBP have been proposed, most have failed to substantially reduce the incidence and recurrence rates of LBP (Steffens et al., 2016).A plausible explanation for the lack of effectiveness of these programs is our poor understanding of the causes of this condition, and therefore identifying strong modifiable risk factors is essential. Importantly, most previous studies in Protective and Harmful Effects of Physical Activity for Low back Pain influence of genetic factors, which have been shown to explain up to 67% of the underlying disposition to develop LBP (Ferreira et al., 2013;Nielsen et al., 2012).A recent review has found moderate quality evidence that exercise in combination with education decreases the risk of LBP by half (Steffens et al., 2016). However, given the limited number of trials identified in the literature, the specific effects o...

show abstract

Validity of self-measured waist circumference in adults at risk of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease

Cited by 9 publications

References 28 publications

Reliability and criterion validity of self-measured waist, hip, and neck circumferences

Reliability and criterion validity of self-measured waist, hip, and neck circumferences

Adherence to the healthy Nordic diet is associated with weight change during 7 years of follow-up

Protective and Harmful Effects of Physical Activity for Low Back Pain: A Protocol for the AUstralian Twin BACK Pain (AUTBACK) Feasibility Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About