Cited by 169Body Composition Measurement TechniquesReliability and Agreement in MeasurementStatistical Methods in Epidemiology

Measurement error of waist circumference: gaps in knowledge

Open access
Verweij, Lisanne M, Terwee, Caroline B, Proper, Karin I, Hulshof, Carel TJ, van Mechelen, Willem·2013·Public Health Nutrition

Abstract

Objective: It is not clear whether measuring waist circumference in clinical practice is problematic because the measurement error is unclear, as well as what constitutes a clinically relevant change. The present study aimed to summarize what is known from state-of-the-art research. Design: To identify the magnitude of the measurement error of waist circumference measurements from the literature, a search was conducted in PubMed from 1975 to February 2011. Results: The measurement error may vary between 0·7 cm and 15 cm. Taking a realistic range of measurable waist circumference into account (60–135 cm), we argue that a short-term clinically relevant change in waist circumference of 5 % may lie between 3·0 and 6·8 cm and a maintained clinically relevant change of 3 % between 1·8 and 4·1 cm. Conclusions: Based on these results, we conclude it may be difficult to distinguish clinically relevant change from measurement error in individual subjects, due to the large measurement error and unclear definition of clinically relevant change. More research is needed to address these gaps in knowledge. To minimize measurement error, we recommend using a uniform measurement protocol, training and repeated measurements.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1368980012002741

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Despite statistical significance, the exercise-induced waist circumference changes may be of unclear clinical relevance, since the observed average reduction from baseline was 2.8% (95% CI 1.31 to 4.24), which is less than the suggested 3-5% reduction considered clinically significant.

    “However, despite statistical significance, the exercise-induced WC changes may be of unclear clinical relevance, since the observed average reduction from baseline was 2.8% (95% CI 1.31 to 4.24), which is less than the suggested 3–5% reduction considered as clinically significant [151].”

    From Exercise, or exercise and diet for the management of polycystic ovary syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2019) · cites this paper as [151]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Verweij, L. M., Terwee, C. B., Proper, K. I., Hulshof, C. T., & van Mechelen, W.
Affiliations
  • Amsterdam Public Health (NL)
  • Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam (NL)
Corresponding author
Proper, Karin I
Venue
Public Health Nutrition
Published
2012-05-25
Volume
16
Issue
2
Pages
281-288
ISSN
  • 1368-9800 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-2727
OpenAlex
W2102693640
Cited by
169
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 5
FWCI
0.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Public Health Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (publishedVersion)
  • Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • TNO Repository (submittedVersion)
  • Repository hosted by TU Delft Library (TU Delft) (submittedVersion)
Funders
ZonMw (120510007)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Reliability and Agreement in Measurement
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
Keywords
waist circumference, measurement error, anthropometry, measurement protocol, abdominal obesity, body composition assessment
MeSH terms
Anthropometry, Diagnostic Errors, Humans, Waist Circumference, Obesity, Abdominal

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review