Abstract
Froehlich-Grobe K, Nary DE, VanSciver A, Washburn RA, Aaronson L. Truth be told: evidence
of wheelchair users' accuracy in reporting their height and weight.
Objectives
To examine whether wheelchair users' self-reports of height and weight differed significantly
from direct measurements and whether weight category classifications differed substantially
when based on self-reported or measured values.
Design
Single group, cross-sectional analysis. Analyses included paired t tests, chi-square test, analysis of variance, and Bland-Altman agreement analyses.
Setting
A university-based exercise lab.
Participants
Community-dwelling wheelchair users (N=125).
Interventions
Not applicable.
Main Outcome Measure
Participants' self-reported and measured height, weight, and body mass index.
Results
Paired t tests revealed that there were significant differences between wheelchair users'
self-reported and measured values for height (difference of 3.1±7.6cm [1.2±3.0in]),
weight (−1.7±6.5kg [−3.6±14.2lb]), and BMI (−1.6±3.3). These discrepancies also led
to substantial misclassification into weight categories, with reliance on self-reported
BMI underestimating the weight status of 20% of the sample.
Conclusions
Our findings suggest that similar to the general population, wheelchair users are
prone to errors when reporting their height and weight and that these errors may exceed
those noted in the general population.
Key Words
List of Abbreviations:
ANOVA (analysis of variance), BMI (body mass index), SCI (spinal cord injury)To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Archives of Physical Medicine and RehabilitationAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Prevalence of obesity and trends in the distribution of body mass index among US adults, 1999-2010.JAMA. 2012; 307: 491-497
- Obesity and overweight.(Accessed October 27, 2011)
- Cause-specific excess deaths associated with underweight, overweight, and obesity.JAMA. 2007; 298: 2028-2037
- Clinical Guidelines on the Identification, Evaluation, and Treatment of Overweight and Obesity in Adults–The Evidence Report.Obes Res. 1998; 6: 51S-209S
- Validity of overweight and obesity in a nation based on self-report versus measurement device data.Eur J Clin Nutr. 2006; 60: 372-377
- Self-reported weight and height.Am J Clin Nutr. 1990; 52: 1125-1133
- A comparison of direct vs. self-report measures for assessing height, weight, and body mass index: a systematic review.Obes Rev. 2007; 8: 307-326
- Self-reported weight and height: implications for obesity research.Am J Prev Med. 2001; 20: 294-298
- 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. 2001; 101: 28-34
- Desire for the body normal: body image and discrepancies between self reported and measured height and weight in a British population.J Epidemiol Community Health. 1996; 50: 105-106
- Accuracy of self-reported height and weight in a community-based sample of older African Americans and Whites.J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2010; 65: 1123-1129
- Accuracy and usefulness of BMI measures based on self-reported weight and height: findings from the NHANES and NHIS 2001-2006.BMC Public Health. 2009; 9: 421
- 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. 2005; 4: 27-34
- Accuracy of self-reported body weight, height and waist circumference in a Dutch overweight working population.BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2008; 8: 69
- Validity of self-report screening for overweight and obesity.Can J Public Health. 2008; 99: 423-427
- Obesity among adults with disabling conditions.JAMA. 2002; 288: 1265-1268
- State-specific prevalence of obesity among adults with disabilities–eight states and the District of Columbia, 1998-1999.MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2002; 51: 805-808
- Disability and health in the United States, 2001-2005.in: National Center for Health Statistics, Hyattsville2008: 34-36
- Accessibility of primary care physician practice sites in South Carolina for people with disabilities.Disabil Health J. 2008; 1: 209-214
- Measuring height without a stadiometer: empirical investigation of four height estimates among wheelchair users.Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2011; 90: 658-666
- Assessment of stature in spinal cord injury.J Spinal Cord Med. 1997; 20: 36-42
- Recruitment issues in a randomized controlled exercise trial targeting wheelchair users.Contemp Clin Trials. 2011; 32: 188-195
- (inventor)Adjustable T Square.(U.S. patent 4,525,933)July 2, 1985
- Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.Lancet. 1986; 327: 307-310
- Healthy body mass index values often underestimate body fat in men with spinal cord injury.Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003; 84: 1068-1071
- A review of body mass index and waist circumference as markers of obesity and coronary heart disease risk in persons with chronic spinal cord injury.Spinal Cord. 2005; 43: 513-518
- Lowering body mass index cutoffs better identifies obese persons with spinal cord injury.Spinal Cord. 2009; 47: 757-762
- Visceral adipose tissue and the ratio of visceral to subcutaneous adipose tissue are greater in adults with than in those without spinal cord injury, despite matching waist circumferences.Am J Clin Nutr. 2008; 87: 600-607
- Health of community-dwelling adults with mobility limitations in the United States: prevalent health conditions.Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008; 89: 210-218
- Health disparities among adults with physical disabilities or cognitive limitations compared to individuals with no disabilities in the United States.Disabil Health J. 2011; 4: 59-67
Article info
Publication history
Published online: May 17, 2012
Footnotes
Supported by National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)/National Institutes of Health (NIH) (grant no: R01 HD048628) and Frontiers: The Heartland Institute for Clinical and Translational Research (University of Kansas Medical Center’s CTSA: UL1RR033179). The contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH, NICHD, or National Center on Medical Rehabilitation Research.
No commercial party having a direct financial interest in the results of the research supporting this article has or will confer a benefit on the authors or on any organization with which the authors are associated.
Clinical Trial Registration No.: NCT00866112.
In-press corrected proof published online on Jun 26, 2012, at www.archives-pmr.org.
Reprints are not available from the author.
Identification
Copyright
© 2012 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
