Display options
Cite
Lauria MW, Moreira LM, Machado-Coelho GL, et al. Ability of body mass index to predict abnormal waist circumference: receiving operating characteristics analysis. Diabetol Metab Syndr. 2013;5(1):74doi: 10.1186/1758-5996-5-74.
Lauria, M. W., Moreira, L. M., Machado-Coelho, G. L., Neto, R. M., Soares, M. M., & Ramos, A. V. (2013). Ability of body mass index to predict abnormal waist circumference: receiving operating characteristics analysis. Diabetology & metabolic syndrome, 5(1), 74. https://doi.org/10.1186/1758-5996-5-74
Lauria, Márcio Weissheimer, et al. "Ability of body mass index to predict abnormal waist circumference: receiving operating characteristics analysis." Diabetology & metabolic syndrome vol. 5,1 (2013): 74. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/1758-5996-5-74
Lauria MW, Moreira LM, Machado-Coelho GL, Neto RM, Soares MM, Ramos AV. Ability of body mass index to predict abnormal waist circumference: receiving operating characteristics analysis. Diabetol Metab Syndr. 2013 Nov 19;5(1):74. doi: 10.1186/1758-5996-5-74. PMID: 24252564; PMCID: PMC3918104.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Diabetol Metab Syndr. 2013 Nov 19;5(1):74. doi: 10.1186/1758-5996-5-74.

Ability of body mass index to predict abnormal waist circumference: receiving operating characteristics analysis.

Diabetology & metabolic syndrome

Márcio Weissheimer Lauria, Lívia Maria Pinheiro Moreira, George Luiz Lins Machado-Coelho, Raimundo Marques do Nascimento Neto, Maria Marta Sarquis Soares, Adauto Versiani Ramos

Affiliations

  1. Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil. [email protected].

PMID: 24252564 PMCID: PMC3918104 DOI: 10.1186/1758-5996-5-74

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Body mass index (BMI) and waist circumference (WC) are the most used anthropometric measures to identify obesity. While BMI is considered to be a simple and accurate estimate of general adiposity, WC is an alternative surrogate measure of visceral obesity. However, WC is subject to significant inter-examiner variation. The aim of the present study was to correlate BMI and WC measures in a group of Brazilian adults to determine the most accurate BMI values for predicting abnormal WC.

METHODS: BMI and WC were measured in 1184 volunteers (45.6 ± 17.3 yrs; 69% female) using standard procedures. Abnormal WC was defined as ≥88 cm in women and ≥102 cm in men using the traditional criteria, and ≥80 cm in women and ≥90 cm in men using the new criteria. Statistical analysis involved the calculation of Pearson's correlation coefficients and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.

RESULTS: BMI was strongly correlated with WC (women: r = 0.87, p < 0.0001, area under ROC curve = 0.93 ± 0.1; men: r = 0.89, p < 0.0001, area under ROC curve = 0.94 ± 0.01). The most accurate BMI cutoff point for abnormal WC was 27.1 kg/m2 for men and 26.8 kg/m2 for women using the traditional WC criteria, and 24.7 kg/m2 for men and 24.9 kg/m2 for women using the new WC criteria.

CONCLUSION: Based on the strong correlation found with WC, BMI can be used as the primary anthropometric measure to estimate adiposity, since both obese and most overweight subjects will have abnormal WC.

References

  1. JAMA. 2013 Jan 2;309(1):71-82 - PubMed
  2. Lancet. 2011 Feb 12;377(9765):557-67 - PubMed
  3. Arch Intern Med. 2002 Sep 9;162(16):1867-72 - PubMed
  4. Arch Intern Med. 2010 Jan 11;170(1):27-40 - PubMed
  5. Obes Res. 1994 Jan;2(1):72-85 - PubMed
  6. N Engl J Med. 2008 Nov 13;359(20):2105-20 - PubMed
  7. Diabetes Care. 2007 Jun;30(6):1647-52 - PubMed
  8. Epidemiol Rev. 2007;29:115-28 - PubMed
  9. Neth Heart J. 2012 May;20(5):208-18 - PubMed
  10. Ann Intern Med. 1995 Apr 1;122(7):481-6 - PubMed
  11. BMJ. 1995 Jul 15;311(6998):158-61 - PubMed
  12. N Engl J Med. 2003 Apr 24;348(17):1625-38 - PubMed
  13. Am J Clin Nutr. 2010 Mar;91(3):547-56 - PubMed
  14. Int J Obes (Lond). 2010 May;34(5):791-9 - PubMed
  15. Prev Med. 2008 Oct;47(4):389-93 - PubMed
  16. World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser. 2000;894:i-xii, 1-253 - PubMed
  17. Lancet. 2011 Mar 26;377(9771):1085-95 - PubMed
  18. Lancet. 2009 Mar 28;373(9669):1083-96 - PubMed

Publication Types