Suppr超能文献

绝经后妇女体重指数相关暴露错分类的分层概率偏差分析。

Stratified Probabilistic Bias Analysis for Body Mass Index-related Exposure Misclassification in Postmenopausal Women.

机构信息

From the Department of Epidemiology and Environmental Health, School of Public Health and Health Professions, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York, NY.

Department of Global Health and Center for Global Health and Development, Boston University School of Public Health, MA.

出版信息

Epidemiology. 2018 Sep;29(5):604-613. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0000000000000863.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

There is widespread concern about the use of body mass index (BMI) to define obesity status in postmenopausal women because it may not accurately represent an individual's true obesity status. The objective of the present study is to examine and adjust for exposure misclassification bias from using an indirect measure of obesity (BMI) compared with a direct measure of obesity (percent body fat).

METHODS

We used data from postmenopausal non-Hispanic black and non-Hispanic white women in the Women's Health Initiative (n=126,459). Within the Women's Health Initiative, a sample of 11,018 women were invited to participate in a sub-study involving dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry scans. We examined indices of validity comparing BMI-defined obesity (≥30 kg/m), with obesity defined by percent body fat. We then used probabilistic bias analysis models stratified by age and race to explore the effect of exposure misclassification on the obesity-mortality relationship.

RESULTS

Validation analyses highlight that using a BMI cutpoint of 30 kg/m to define obesity in postmenopausal women is associated with poor validity. There were notable differences in sensitivity by age and race. Results from the stratified bias analysis demonstrated that failing to adjust for exposure misclassification bias results in attenuated estimates of the obesity-mortality relationship. For example, in non-Hispanic white women 50-59 years of age, the conventional risk difference was 0.017 (95% confidence interval = 0.01, 0.023) and the bias-adjusted risk difference was 0.035 (95% simulation interval = 0.028, 0.043).

CONCLUSIONS

These results demonstrate the importance of using quantitative bias analysis techniques to account for nondifferential exposure misclassification of BMI-defined obesity. See video abstract at, http://links.lww.com/EDE/B385.

摘要

背景

人们普遍担心使用体重指数(BMI)来定义绝经后妇女的肥胖状态,因为它可能无法准确代表个体的真实肥胖状态。本研究的目的是检验并调整使用间接肥胖指标(BMI)与直接肥胖指标(体脂肪百分比)相比时的暴露分类偏倚。

方法

我们使用了妇女健康倡议(WHI)中绝经后非西班牙裔黑人和非西班牙裔白人女性的数据(n=126459)。在 WHI 中,邀请了 11018 名女性参加一项涉及双能 X 射线吸收法扫描的子研究。我们比较了 BMI 定义的肥胖(≥30kg/m2)与体脂肪百分比定义的肥胖,以检验其有效性指标。然后,我们使用概率偏差分析模型按年龄和种族分层,探讨暴露分类错误对肥胖与死亡率关系的影响。

结果

验证分析强调,在绝经后妇女中使用 BMI 切点 30kg/m2 来定义肥胖与较差的有效性相关。年龄和种族的敏感性存在显著差异。分层偏差分析的结果表明,未能调整暴露分类错误会导致肥胖与死亡率关系的估计值减弱。例如,在 50-59 岁的非西班牙裔白人女性中,常规风险差异为 0.017(95%置信区间=0.01,0.023),偏差调整后的风险差异为 0.035(95%模拟区间=0.028,0.043)。

结论

这些结果表明,使用定量偏差分析技术来解释 BMI 定义的肥胖的非差异性暴露分类错误非常重要。请观看视频摘要,网址为,http://links.lww.com/EDE/B385。

相似文献

5
BMI-related errors in the measurement of obesity.肥胖测量中与体重指数相关的误差。
Int J Obes (Lond). 2008 Aug;32 Suppl 3:S56-9. doi: 10.1038/ijo.2008.87.

引用本文的文献

8
Toward a better understanding about real-world evidence.迈向对真实世界证据更好的理解。
Eur J Hosp Pharm. 2022 Jan;29(1):8-11. doi: 10.1136/ejhpharm-2021-003081. Epub 2021 Dec 2.
10
Association of Adipose Tissue Distribution With Type 2 Diabetes in Breast Cancer Patients.乳腺癌患者脂肪组织分布与2型糖尿病的关联
Breast Cancer (Auckl). 2020 Nov 23;14:1178223420972369. doi: 10.1177/1178223420972369. eCollection 2020.

本文引用的文献

3
A requiem for BMI in the clinical setting.临床环境中身体质量指数(BMI)的挽歌。
Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2017 Sep;20(5):314-321. doi: 10.1097/MCO.0000000000000395.
4
Body composition by DXA.双能 X 线吸收法测定身体成分。
Bone. 2017 Nov;104:101-105. doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2017.06.010. Epub 2017 Jun 16.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验