BMI self-selection: Exploring alternatives to self-reported BMI

Frances Shiely; Seán R Millar

doi:10.1177/26320843211010061

BMI self-selection: Exploring alternatives to self-reported BMI

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Background Accurately measuring BMI in large epidemiological studies is problematic as objective measurements are expensive, so subjective methodologies must usually suffice. The purpose of this study is to explore a new subjective method of BMI measurement: BMI self-selection. Methods A cross-sectional analysis of the Mitchelstown Cohort Rescreen study, a random sample of 1,354 men and women aged 51–77 years recruited from a single primary care centre. BMI self-selection was measured by asking patients to select their BMI category: underweight, normal weight, overweight, obese. Weight and height were also objectively measured. Results 79% were overweight or obese: 86% of males, 69% of females (P < 0.001) and 59% of these underestimated their BMI. The sensitivity for correct BMI self-selection for normal weight, overweight and obese was 77%, 61% and 11% respectively. In multivariable analysis, gender, higher education levels, being told by a health professional to lose weight, and being on a diet were significantly associated with correct BMI self-selection. There was a linear trend relationship between increasing BMI levels and correct selection of BMI; participants in the highest BMI quartile had an approximate eight-fold increased odds of correctly selecting their BMI when compared to participants within the lower overweight/obese quartiles (OR = 7.72, 95%CI:4.59, 12.98). Conclusions BMI self-selection may be useful for self-reporting BMI. Clinicians need to be aware of disparities between BMI self-selection at higher and lower BMI levels among overweight/obese patients and encourage preventative action for those at the lower levels to avoid weight gain and thus reduce their all-cause mortality risk.

Original language	English
Journal	Research Methods in Medicine & Health Sciences
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1177/26320843211010061
Publication status	Published - Jul 2021

Keywords

Overweight
Underweight
Medicine
Quartile
Body mass index
Obesity
Demography
Odds
Cohort
Gerontology
Physical therapy
Internal medicine
Logistic regression
Confidence interval
Sociology

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1177/26320843211010061

Cite this

@article{5b462a8655fe4781ad6de4012fe332e8,

title = "BMI self-selection: Exploring alternatives to self-reported BMI",

abstract = "Background Accurately measuring BMI in large epidemiological studies is problematic as objective measurements are expensive, so subjective methodologies must usually suffice. The purpose of this study is to explore a new subjective method of BMI measurement: BMI self-selection. Methods A cross-sectional analysis of the Mitchelstown Cohort Rescreen study, a random sample of 1,354 men and women aged 51–77 years recruited from a single primary care centre. BMI self-selection was measured by asking patients to select their BMI category: underweight, normal weight, overweight, obese. Weight and height were also objectively measured. Results 79\% were overweight or obese: 86\% of males, 69\% of females (P < 0.001) and 59\% of these underestimated their BMI. The sensitivity for correct BMI self-selection for normal weight, overweight and obese was 77\%, 61\% and 11\% respectively. In multivariable analysis, gender, higher education levels, being told by a health professional to lose weight, and being on a diet were significantly associated with correct BMI self-selection. There was a linear trend relationship between increasing BMI levels and correct selection of BMI; participants in the highest BMI quartile had an approximate eight-fold increased odds of correctly selecting their BMI when compared to participants within the lower overweight/obese quartiles (OR = 7.72, 95\%CI:4.59, 12.98). Conclusions BMI self-selection may be useful for self-reporting BMI. Clinicians need to be aware of disparities between BMI self-selection at higher and lower BMI levels among overweight/obese patients and encourage preventative action for those at the lower levels to avoid weight gain and thus reduce their all-cause mortality risk. ",

keywords = "Overweight, Underweight, Medicine, Quartile, Body mass index, Obesity, Demography, Odds, Cohort, Gerontology, Physical therapy, Internal medicine, Logistic regression, Confidence interval, Sociology",

author = "Frances Shiely and Millar, \{Se{\'a}n R\}",

year = "2021",

month = jul,

doi = "10.1177/26320843211010061",

language = "English",

journal = "Research Methods in Medicine \& Health Sciences",

issn = "2632-0843",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - BMI self-selection: Exploring alternatives to self-reported BMI

AU - Shiely, Frances

AU - Millar, Seán R

PY - 2021/7

Y1 - 2021/7

N2 - Background Accurately measuring BMI in large epidemiological studies is problematic as objective measurements are expensive, so subjective methodologies must usually suffice. The purpose of this study is to explore a new subjective method of BMI measurement: BMI self-selection. Methods A cross-sectional analysis of the Mitchelstown Cohort Rescreen study, a random sample of 1,354 men and women aged 51–77 years recruited from a single primary care centre. BMI self-selection was measured by asking patients to select their BMI category: underweight, normal weight, overweight, obese. Weight and height were also objectively measured. Results 79% were overweight or obese: 86% of males, 69% of females (P < 0.001) and 59% of these underestimated their BMI. The sensitivity for correct BMI self-selection for normal weight, overweight and obese was 77%, 61% and 11% respectively. In multivariable analysis, gender, higher education levels, being told by a health professional to lose weight, and being on a diet were significantly associated with correct BMI self-selection. There was a linear trend relationship between increasing BMI levels and correct selection of BMI; participants in the highest BMI quartile had an approximate eight-fold increased odds of correctly selecting their BMI when compared to participants within the lower overweight/obese quartiles (OR = 7.72, 95%CI:4.59, 12.98). Conclusions BMI self-selection may be useful for self-reporting BMI. Clinicians need to be aware of disparities between BMI self-selection at higher and lower BMI levels among overweight/obese patients and encourage preventative action for those at the lower levels to avoid weight gain and thus reduce their all-cause mortality risk.

AB - Background Accurately measuring BMI in large epidemiological studies is problematic as objective measurements are expensive, so subjective methodologies must usually suffice. The purpose of this study is to explore a new subjective method of BMI measurement: BMI self-selection. Methods A cross-sectional analysis of the Mitchelstown Cohort Rescreen study, a random sample of 1,354 men and women aged 51–77 years recruited from a single primary care centre. BMI self-selection was measured by asking patients to select their BMI category: underweight, normal weight, overweight, obese. Weight and height were also objectively measured. Results 79% were overweight or obese: 86% of males, 69% of females (P < 0.001) and 59% of these underestimated their BMI. The sensitivity for correct BMI self-selection for normal weight, overweight and obese was 77%, 61% and 11% respectively. In multivariable analysis, gender, higher education levels, being told by a health professional to lose weight, and being on a diet were significantly associated with correct BMI self-selection. There was a linear trend relationship between increasing BMI levels and correct selection of BMI; participants in the highest BMI quartile had an approximate eight-fold increased odds of correctly selecting their BMI when compared to participants within the lower overweight/obese quartiles (OR = 7.72, 95%CI:4.59, 12.98). Conclusions BMI self-selection may be useful for self-reporting BMI. Clinicians need to be aware of disparities between BMI self-selection at higher and lower BMI levels among overweight/obese patients and encourage preventative action for those at the lower levels to avoid weight gain and thus reduce their all-cause mortality risk.

KW - Overweight

KW - Underweight

KW - Medicine

KW - Quartile

KW - Body mass index

KW - Obesity

KW - Demography

KW - Odds

KW - Cohort

KW - Gerontology

KW - Physical therapy

KW - Internal medicine

KW - Logistic regression

KW - Confidence interval

KW - Sociology

UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/26320843211010061

U2 - 10.1177/26320843211010061

DO - 10.1177/26320843211010061

M3 - Article

SN - 2632-0843

JO - Research Methods in Medicine & Health Sciences

JF - Research Methods in Medicine & Health Sciences

ER -

BMI self-selection: Exploring alternatives to self-reported BMI

Abstract

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this