Suppr超能文献

人体测量学工具在肥胖判断中的表现:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。

The performance of anthropometric tools to determine obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department for Evidence-Based Medicine and Evaluation, Danube University Krems, Dr.-Karl-Dorrek-Straße 30, 3500, Krems, Austria.

RTI-UNC Evidence-Based Practice Center, Research Triangle Institute International, East Cornwallis Road, Post Office Box 12194, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709-2194, USA.

出版信息

Sci Rep. 2020 Jul 29;10(1):12699. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-69498-7.

Abstract

The aim of this systematic review was to assess the performance of anthropometric tools to determine obesity in the general population (CRD42018086888). Our review included 32 studies. To detect obesity with body mass index (BMI), the meta-analyses rendered a sensitivity of 51.4% (95% CI 38.5-64.2%) and a specificity of 95.4% (95% CI 90.7-97.8%) in women, and 49.6% (95% CI 34.8-64.5%) and 97.3% (95% CI 92.1-99.1%), respectively, in men. For waist circumference (WC), the summary estimates for the sensitivity were 62.4% (95% CI 49.2-73.9%) and 88.1% for the specificity (95% CI 77.0-94.2%) in men, and 57.0% (95% CI 32.2-79.0%) and 94.8% (95% CI 85.8-98.2%), respectively, in women. The data were insufficient to pool the results for waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) and waist-to-height ratio (WHtR) but were similar to BMI and WC. In conclusion, BMI and WC have serious limitations for use as obesity screening tools in clinical practice despite their widespread use. No evidence supports that WHR and WHtR are more suitable than BMI or WC to assess body fat. However, due to the lack of more accurate and feasible alternatives, BMI and WC might still have a role as initial tools for assessing individuals for excess adiposity until new evidence emerges.

摘要

本系统评价的目的是评估人体测量学工具在普通人群中用于确定肥胖的性能(CRD42018086888)。我们的综述包括 32 项研究。使用体重指数(BMI)来检测肥胖时,荟萃分析得出女性的敏感度为 51.4%(95%CI 38.5-64.2%),特异性为 95.4%(95%CI 90.7-97.8%),而男性的敏感度为 49.6%(95%CI 34.8-64.5%),特异性为 97.3%(95%CI 92.1-99.1%)。对于腰围(WC),汇总估计的男性敏感度为 62.4%(95%CI 49.2-73.9%),特异性为 88.1%(95%CI 77.0-94.2%),而女性的敏感度为 57.0%(95%CI 32.2-79.0%),特异性为 94.8%(95%CI 85.8-98.2%)。汇总结果的数据不足以支持腰臀比(WHR)和腰高比(WHtR),但与 BMI 和 WC 相似。总之,尽管 BMI 和 WC 被广泛应用,但它们作为临床实践中肥胖筛查工具存在严重局限性。没有证据表明 WHR 和 WHtR 比 BMI 或 WC 更适合评估体脂肪。然而,由于缺乏更准确和可行的替代方法,BMI 和 WC 可能仍然作为评估个体肥胖的初始工具,直到出现新的证据。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/706d/7391719/c7e9742eb117/41598_2020_69498_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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