Xie Yao Jie, Ho Suzanne C, Liu Zhao Min, Hui Stanley Sai-Chuen
Department of Sports Science and Physical Education, the Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Division of Epidemiology, The Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, the Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.
PLoS One. 2014 Sep 15;9(9):e107233. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0107233. eCollection 2014.
To assess the validity of self-reported weight, height, body mass index (BMI), waist circumference and blood pressure compared with standardized clinical measurements and to determine the classification accuracy in overweight/obesity and central adiposity.
This pilot study was integrated into a life-course study entitled "Hong Kong Women's Health Study" among 1,253 female nurses in Hong Kong who were aged 35 years to 65 years. Data were collected from self-administered questionnaires that were mailed to the respondents. Of these participants, we obtained the standard body measurements of 144 (11.5%) at our research center. We then compared the self-reported anthropometric variables and blood pressure with the measured data to assess validity based on the level of misreporting, percentage of agreement, consistency, sensitivity and specificity.
The self-reported and measured values were highly correlated in terms of anthropometry and blood pressure (correlation coefficients ranged from 0.72 to 0.96). Height was overestimated at an average of 0.42 cm, and waist circumference was underestimated at 2.33 cm (both P<0.05), while no significant differences were observed from weight, blood pressure and BMI (all P>0.05). The proportions of overweight, obesity, and central adiposity by self-reported data did not vary greatly from the measured data (all P>0.05). The self-reporting resulted in correct classifications of BMI, waist circumference, and systolic blood pressure in 85%, 78%, and 87% of women, with corresponding Kappa index values of 0.79, 0.55, and 0.82, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity were 84.6% and 95.7%, respectively, with respect to overweight/obesity detection, whereas those for central adiposity detection were 70.6% and 83.8%, respectively.
In a sample of female Hong Kong nurses, the self-reported measures of height, weight, BMI, waist circumference and blood pressure were generally valid. Furthermore, the classification accuracies of overweight/obesity and central adiposity were acceptable.
评估自我报告的体重、身高、体重指数（BMI）、腰围和血压与标准化临床测量值相比的有效性，并确定超重/肥胖和中心性肥胖的分类准确性。
这项试点研究纳入了一项名为“香港女性健康研究”的生命历程研究，对象为香港1253名年龄在35岁至65岁之间的女护士。数据通过邮寄给受访者的自填问卷收集。在这些参与者中，我们在研究中心获得了144名（11.5%）参与者的标准身体测量数据。然后，我们将自我报告的人体测量变量和血压与测量数据进行比较，根据误报水平、一致百分比、一致性、敏感性和特异性来评估有效性。
自我报告值与测量值在人体测量和血压方面高度相关（相关系数范围为0.72至0.96）。身高平均高估0.42厘米，腰围低估2.33厘米（均P<0.05），而体重、血压和BMI未观察到显著差异（均P>0.05）。自我报告数据中超重、肥胖和中心性肥胖的比例与测量数据相比差异不大（均P>0.05）。自我报告在85%、78%和87%的女性中对BMI、腰围和收缩压进行了正确分类，相应的Kappa指数值分别为0.79、0.55和0.82。超重/肥胖检测的敏感性和特异性分别为84.6%和95.7%，而中心性肥胖检测的敏感性和特异性分别为70.6%和83.8%。
在香港女护士样本中，自我报告的身高、体重、BMI、腰围和血压测量值总体上是有效的。此外，超重/肥胖和中心性肥胖的分类准确性是可以接受的。
