Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Accuracy of self-reported weight in the Women’s Health Initiative

  • Juhua Luo (a1), Cynthia A Thomson (a2), Michael Hendryx (a3), Lesley F Tinker (a4), JoAnn E Manson (a5), Yueyao Li (a1), Dorothy A Nelson (a6), Mara Z Vitolins (a7), Rebecca A Seguin (a8), Charles B Eaton (a9) (a10), Jean Wactawski-Wende (a11) and Karen L Margolis (a12)...

Abstract

Objective

To assess the extent of error present in self-reported weight data in the Women’s Health Initiative, variables that may be associated with error, and to develop methods to reduce any identified error.

Design

Prospective cohort study.

Setting

Forty clinical centres in the USA.

Participants

Women (n 75 336) participating in the Women’s Health Initiative Observational Study (WHI-OS) and women (n 6236) participating in the WHI Long Life Study (LLS) with self-reported and measured weight collected about 20 years later (2013–2014).

Results

The correlation between self-reported and measured weights was 0·97. On average, women under-reported their weight by about 2 lb (0·91 kg). The discrepancies varied by age, race/ethnicity, education and BMI. Compared with normal-weight women, underweight women over-reported their weight by 3·86 lb (1·75 kg) and obese women under-reported their weight by 4·18 lb (1·90 kg) on average. The higher the degree of excess weight, the greater the under-reporting of weight. Adjusting self-reported weight for an individual’s age, race/ethnicity and education yielded an identical average weight to that measured.

Conclusions

Correlations between self-reported and measured weights in the WHI are high. Discrepancies varied by different sociodemographic characteristics, especially an individual’s BMI. Correction of self-reported weight for individual characteristics could improve the accuracy of assessment of obesity status in postmenopausal women.

  • 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. 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 of self-reported weight in the Women’s Health Initiative
      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 <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Accuracy of self-reported weight in the Women’s Health Initiative
      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 <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Accuracy of self-reported weight in the Women’s Health Initiative
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

Corresponding author

*Corresponding author: Email juhluo@indiana.edu

References

Hide All
1. Anai, A, Ueda, K, Harada, K et al. (2015) Determinant factors of the difference between self-reported weight and measured weight among Japanese. Environ Health Prev 20, 447454.
2. Gorber, SC, Tremblay, M, Moher, D et al. (2007) Diagnostic in obesity comorbidities – a comparison of direct vs. self-report measures for assessing height, weight and body mass index: a systematic review. Obes Rev 8, 307326.
3. Spencer, EA, Appleby, PN, Davey, GK et al. (2002) Validity of self-reported height and weight in 4808 EPIC-Oxford participants. Public Health Nutr 5, 561565.
4. Palta, M, Prineas, RJ, Berman, R et al. (1982) Comparison of self-reported and measured height and weight. Am J Epidemiol 115, 223230.
5. Johnson, WD, Bouchard, C, Newton, RL Jr et al. (2009) Ethnic differences in self-reported and measured obesity. Obesity (Silver Spring) 17, 571577.
6. Dijkshoorn, H, Ujcic-Voortman, JK, Viet, L et al. (2011) Ethnic variation in validity of the estimated obesity prevalence using self-reported weight and height measurements. BMC Public Health 11, 408.
7. Stommel, M & Schoenborn, CA (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.
8. Lin, CJ, DeRoo, LA, Jacobs, SR et al. (2012) Accuracy and reliability of self-reported weight and height in the Sister Study. Public Health Nutr 15, 989999.
9. May, AM, Barnes, DR, Forouhi, NG et al. (2013) Prediction of measured weight from self-reported weight was not improved after stratification by body mass index. Obesity (Silver Spring) 21, E137E142.
10. Gillum, RF & Sempos, CT (2005) Ethnic variation in validity of classification of overweight and obesity using self-reported weight and height in American women and men: the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Nutr J 4, 27.
11. Fernandez-Rhodes, L, Robinson, WR, Sotres-Alvarez, D et al. (2017) Accuracy of self-reported weight in Hispanic/Latino adults of the Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos. Epidemiology 28, 847853.
12. Griebeler, ML, Levis, S, Beringer, LM et al. (2011) Self-reported versus measured height and weight in Hispanic and non-Hispanic menopausal women. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 20, 599604.
13. Grossschadl, F, Haditsch, B & Stronegger, WJ (2012) Validity of self-reported weight and height in Austrian adults: sociodemographic determinants and consequences for the classification of BMI categories. Public Health Nutr 15, 2027.
14. Kuczmarski, MF, Kuczmarski, RJ & Najjar, M (2001) Effects of age on validity of self-reported height, weight, and body mass index: findings from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988–1994. J Am Diet Assoc 101, 2834.
15. Finardi, P, Nickel, CH, Koller, MT et al. (2012) Accuracy of self-reported weight in a high risk geriatric population in the emergency department. Swiss Med Wkly 142, w13585.
16. Dahl, AK, Hassing, LB, Fransson, EI et al. (2010) Agreement between self-reported and measured height, weight and body mass index in old age-a longitudinal study with 20 years of follow-up. Age Ageing 39, 445451.
17. Villanueva, EV (2001) The validity of self-reported weight in US adults: a population based cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health 1, 11.
18. The Women’s Health Initiative Study Group (1998) Design of the Women’s Health Initiative clinical trial and observational study. Control Clin Trials 19, 61109.
19. Hays, J, Hunt, JR, Hubbell, FA et al. (2003) The Women’s Health Initiative recruitment methods and results. Ann Epidemiol 13, 9 Suppl., S18S77.
20. Jackson, RD, LaCroix, AZ, Cauley, JA et al. (2003) The Women’s Health Initiative calcium–vitamin D trial: overview and baseline characteristics of participants. Ann Epidemiol 13, 9 Suppl., S98S106.
21. Langer, RD, White, E, Lewis, CE et al. (2003) The Women’s Health Initiative Observational Study: baseline characteristics of participants and reliability of baseline measures. Ann Epidemiol 13, 9 Suppl., S107S121.
22. Ritenbaugh, C, Patterson, RE, Chlebowski, RT et al. (2003) The Women’s Health Initiative Dietary Modification trial: overview and baseline characteristics of participants. Ann Epidemiol 13, 9 Suppl., S87S97.
23. Stefanick, ML, Cochrane, BB, Hsia, J et al. (2003) The Women’s Health Initiative postmenopausal hormone trials: overview and baseline characteristics of participants. Ann Epidemiol 13, 9 Suppl., S78S86.
24. Bland, JM & Altman, DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1, 307310.
25. Larson, MR (2000) Social desirability and self-reported weight and height. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 24, 663665.

Keywords

Related content

Powered by UNSILO
Type Description Title
PDF
Supplementary materials

Luo et al. supplementary material
Luo et al. supplementary material 1

 PDF (66 KB)
66 KB

Accuracy of self-reported weight in the Women’s Health Initiative

  • Juhua Luo (a1), Cynthia A Thomson (a2), Michael Hendryx (a3), Lesley F Tinker (a4), JoAnn E Manson (a5), Yueyao Li (a1), Dorothy A Nelson (a6), Mara Z Vitolins (a7), Rebecca A Seguin (a8), Charles B Eaton (a9) (a10), Jean Wactawski-Wende (a11) and Karen L Margolis (a12)...

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.