Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/2440/23074
Citations
Scopus Web of ScienceĀ® Altmetric
?
?
Type: Journal article
Title: How valid are self-reported height and weight? A comparison between CATI self-report and clinic measurements using a large cohort study
Author: Taylor, A.
DalGrande, E.
Gill, T.
Chittleborough, C.
Wilson, D.
Adams, R.
Grant, J.
Phillips, P.
Appleton, S.
Ruffin, R.
Citation: Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 2006; 30(3):238-246
Publisher: Public Health Assoc Australia Inc
Issue Date: 2006
ISSN: 1326-0200
1753-6405
Statement of
Responsibility: 
Anne W. Taylor, Eleonora Dal Grande, Tiffany K. Gill, Catherine R. Chittleborough, David H. Wilson, Robert J. Adams, Janet F. Grant, Patrick Phillips, Sarah Appleton and Richard E. Ruffin
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between self-reported and clinical measurements for height and weight in adults aged 18 years and over and to determine the bias associated with using household telephone surveys. METHOD: A representative population sample of adults aged 18 years and over living in the north-west region of Adelaide (n=1,537) were recruited to the biomedical cohort study in 2002/03. A computerassisted telephone interviewing (CATI) system was used to collect self-reported height and weight. Clinical measures were obtained when the cohort study participants attended a clinic for biomedical tests. RESULT: Adults over-estimated their height (by 1.4 cm) and under-estimated their weight (by 1.7 kg). Using the self-report figures the prevalence of overweight/ obese was 56.0% but this prevalence estimate increased to 65.3% when clinical measurements were used. The discrepancy in self-reported height and weight is partly explained by 1) a rounding effect (rounding height and weight to the nearest 0 or 5) and 2) older persons (65+ years) considerably over-estimating their height. CONCLUSION: Self-report is important in monitoring overweight and obesity; however, it must be recognised that prevalence estimates obtained are likely to understate the problem. Implications: The public health focus on obesity is warranted, but self-report estimates, commonly used to highlight the obesity epidemic, are likely to be underestimations. Self-report would be a more reliable measure if people did not round their measurements and if older persons more accurately knew their height.
Keywords: Humans; Obesity; Body Weight; Anthropometry; Body Mass Index; Body Height; Self Care; Health Care Surveys; Sensitivity and Specificity; Cohort Studies; Reproducibility of Results; Age Factors; Sex Factors; Socioeconomic Factors; Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Middle Aged; Female; Male
Description: The definitive version is available at www.blackwell-synergy.com
RMID: 0020061527
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-842X.2006.tb00864.x
Appears in Collections:Public Health publications

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.