Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa

Accuracy and reliability of self-reported weight and height in the Sister Study

  • Cynthia J Lin (a1), Lisa A DeRoo (a1), Sara R Jacobs (a1) and Dale P Sandler (a1)
Abstract
AbstractObjective

To assess the accuracy and reliability of self-reported weight and height and identify the factors associated with reporting accuracy.

Design

Analysis of self-reported and measured weight and height from participants in the Sister Study (2003–2009), a nationwide cohort of 50 884 women aged 35–74 years in the USA with a sister with breast cancer.

Setting

Weight and height were reported via computer-assisted telephone interview (CATI) and self-administered questionnaires, and measured by examiners.

Subjects

Early enrolees in the Sister Study. There were 18 639 women available for the accuracy analyses and 13 316 for the reliability analyses.

Results

Using weighted kappa statistics, comparisons were made between CATI responses and examiner measures to assess accuracy and CATI and questionnaire responses to assess reliability. Polytomous logistic regression evaluated factors associated with over- or under-reporting. Compared with measured values, agreement was 96 % for reported height (±1 inch (±2·5 cm); weighted κ = 0·84) and 67 % for weight (±3 lb (±1·36 kg); weighted κ = 0·92). Obese women (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) were more likely than normal-weight women to under-report weight by ≥5 % and underweight women (BMI < 18·5 kg/m2) were more likely to over-report. Among normal-weight and overweight women (18·5 kg/m2 ≤ BMI < 30 kg/m2), weight cycling and lifetime weight difference ≥50 lb (≥22·68 kg) were associated with over-reporting.

Conclusions

US women in the Sister Study were reasonably reliable and accurate in reporting weight and height. Women with normal-range BMI reported most accurately. Overweight and obese women and those with weight fluctuations were less accurate, but even among obese women, few under-reported their weight by >10 %.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Accuracy and reliability of self-reported weight and height in the Sister Study
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Accuracy and reliability of self-reported weight and height in the Sister Study
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Accuracy and reliability of self-reported weight and height in the Sister Study
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Corresponding author
*Corresponding author: Email sandler@niehs.nih.gov
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

1. CL Ogden , MD Carroll , LR Curtin (2006) Prevalence of overweight and obesity in the United States, 1999–2004. JAMA 295, 15491555.

2. JL Engstrom , SA Paterson , A Doherty (2003) Accuracy of self-reported height and weight in women: an integrative review of the literature. J Midwifery Womens Health 48, 338345.

3. AM Paradis , L Perusse , G Godin (2008) Validity of a self-reported measure of familial history of obesity. Nutr J 7, 27.

4. SC Gorber , M Tremblay , D Moher (2007) A comparison of direct vs. self-report measures for assessing height, weight and body mass index: a systematic review. Obes Rev 8, 307326.

5. RJ Roberts (1995) Can self-reported data accurately describe the prevalence of overweight? Public Health 109, 275284.

6. G Bostrom & F Diderichsen (1997) Socioeconomic differentials in misclassification of height, weight and body mass index based on questionnaire data. Int J Epidemiol 26, 860866.

7. BM Craig & AK Adams (2009) Accuracy of body mass index categories based on self-reported height and weight among women in the United States. Matern Child Health J 13, 489496.

9. M Lahti-Koski , S Mannisto , P Pietinen (2005) Prevalence of weight cycling and its relation to health indicators in Finland. Obes Res 13, 333341.

11. AE Field , T Byers , DJ Hunter (1999) Weight cycling, weight gain, and risk of hypertension in women. Am J Epidemiol 150, 573579.

12. MA White , RM Masheb , C Burke-Martindale (2007) Accuracy of self-reported weight among bariatric surgery candidates: the influence of race and weight cycling. Obesity (Silver Spring) 15, 27612768.

15. YC Probst , S Faraji , M Batterham (2008) Computerized dietary assessments compare well with interviewer administered diet histories for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in the primary healthcare setting. Patient Educ Couns 72, 4955.

16. RE McCabe , T McFarlane , J Polivy (2001) Eating disorders, dieting, and the accuracy of self-reported weight. Int J Eat Disord 29, 5964.

17. C Meyer , J Arcelus & S Wright (2009) Accuracy of self-reported weight and height among women with eating disorders: a replication and extension study. Eur Eat Disord Rev 17, 366370.

18. C Meyer , L McPartlan , J Sines (2009) Accuracy of self-reported weight and height: relationship with eating psychopathology among young women. Int J Eat Disord 42, 379381.

21. JC Dekkers , MF van Wier , IJ Hendriksen (2008) Accuracy of self-reported body weight, height and waist circumference in a Dutch overweight working population. BMC Med Res Methodol 8, 69.

22. SW Keith , KR Fontaine , NM Pajewski (2011) Use of self-reported height and weight biases the body mass index–mortality association. Int J Obes (Lond) 35, 401408.

23. M Stommel & CA Schoenborn (2009) Accuracy and usefulness of BMI measures based on self-reported weight and height: findings from the NHANES & NHIS 2001–2006. BMC Public Health 9, 421.

24. U Orth , RW Robins & LL Meier (2009) Disentangling the effects of low self-esteem and stressful events on depression: findings from three longitudinal studies. J Pers Soc Psychol 97, 307321.

25. U Orth , RW Robins , KH Trzesniewski (2009) Low self-esteem is a risk factor for depressive symptoms from young adulthood to old age. J Abnorm Psychol 118, 472478.

26. K Okamoto , K Ohsuka , T Shiraishi (2002) Comparability of epidemiological information between self- and interviewer-administered questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 55, 505511.

27. J Siemiatycki (1979) A comparison of mail, telephone, and home interview strategies for household health surveys. Am J Public Health 69, 238245.

28. J Brogger , P Bakke , GE Eide (2002) Comparison of telephone and postal survey modes on respiratory symptoms and risk factors. Am J Epidemiol 155, 572576.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Public Health Nutrition
  • ISSN: 1368-9800
  • EISSN: 1475-2727
  • URL: /core/journals/public-health-nutrition
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 1
Total number of PDF views: 46 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 108 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 25th May 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.