How valid are self-reported height and weight? A comparison between CATI self-report and clinic measurements using a large cohort study

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorTaylor, A.
dc.contributor.authorDalGrande, E.
dc.contributor.authorGill, T.
dc.contributor.authorChittleborough, C.
dc.contributor.authorWilson, D.
dc.contributor.authorAdams, R.
dc.contributor.authorGrant, J.
dc.contributor.authorPhillips, P.
dc.contributor.authorAppleton, S.
dc.contributor.authorRuffin, R.
dc.date.issued2006
dc.descriptionThe definitive version is available at www.blackwell-synergy.com
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVE: 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.
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityAnne 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
dc.identifier.citationAustralian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 2006; 30(3):238-246
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1467-842X.2006.tb00864.x
dc.identifier.issn1326-0200
dc.identifier.issn1753-6405
dc.identifier.orcidTaylor, A. [0000-0002-4422-7974]
dc.identifier.orcidDalGrande, E. [0000-0002-5919-3893]
dc.identifier.orcidGill, T. [0000-0002-2822-2436]
dc.identifier.orcidChittleborough, C. [0000-0003-3196-7137]
dc.identifier.orcidAdams, R. [0000-0002-7572-0796]
dc.identifier.orcidGrant, J. [0000-0002-3421-5603]
dc.identifier.orcidAppleton, S. [0000-0001-7292-9714]
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2440/23074
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherPublic Health Assoc Australia Inc
dc.source.urihttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-842x.2006.tb00864.x
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectObesity
dc.subjectBody Weight
dc.subjectAnthropometry
dc.subjectBody Mass Index
dc.subjectBody Height
dc.subjectSelf Care
dc.subjectHealth Care Surveys
dc.subjectSensitivity and Specificity
dc.subjectCohort Studies
dc.subjectReproducibility of Results
dc.subjectAge Factors
dc.subjectSex Factors
dc.subjectSocioeconomic Factors
dc.subjectAdolescent
dc.subjectAdult
dc.subjectAged
dc.subjectMiddle Aged
dc.subjectFemale
dc.subjectMale
dc.titleHow valid are self-reported height and weight? A comparison between CATI self-report and clinic measurements using a large cohort study
dc.typeJournal article
pubs.publication-statusPublished

Files

Collections

Public Health publications