Cited by 1,082Statistical Methods in EpidemiologyBody Composition Measurement TechniquesCancer Risks and Factors

Validity of self-reported height and weight in 4808 EPIC–Oxford participants

Open access
Spencer, Elizabeth A, Appleby, Paul N, Davey, Gwyneth K, Key, Timothy J·2002·Public Health Nutrition

Abstract

Objective: To assess the validity of self-reported height and weight by comparison with measured height and weight in a sample of middle-aged men and women, and to determine the extent of misclassification of body mass index (BMI) arising from differences between self-reported and measured values. Design: Analysis of self-reported and measured height and weight data from participants in the Oxford cohort of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC–Oxford). Subjects: Four thousand eight hundred and eight British men and women aged 35–76 years. Results: Spearman rank correlations between self-reported and measured height, weight and BMI were high (r<0.9,P>0.0001 ). Height was overestimated by a mean of 1.23 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11–1.34) cm in men and 0.60 (0.51–0.70) cm in women; the extent of overestimation was greater in older men and women, shorter men and heavier women. Weight was underestimated by a mean of 1.85 (1.72–1.99) kg in men and 1.40 (1.31–1.49) kg in women; the extent of underestimation was greater in heavier men and women, but did not vary with age or height. Using standard categories of BMI, 22.4% of men and 18.0% of women were classified incorrectly based on self-reported height and weight. After correcting the self-reported values using predictive equations derived from a 10% sample of subjects, misclassification decreased to 15.2% in men and 13.8% in women. Conclusions: Self-reported height and weight data are valid for identifying relationships in epidemiological studies. In analyses where anthropometric factors are the primary variables of interest, measurements in a representative sample of the study population can be used to improve the accuracy of estimates of height, weight and BMI.

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 · 10.1079/phn2001322

Cites

12 of 12 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?

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
Spencer, E. A., Appleby, P. N., Davey, G. K., & Key, T. J.
Affiliations
University of Oxford (GB)
Corresponding author
Spencer, Elizabeth A
Venue
Public Health Nutrition
Published
2002-08
Volume
5
Issue
4
Pages
561-565
ISSN
  • 1368-9800 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-2727
OpenAlex
W2010117564
Cited by
1,082
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 59 · 2020: 42 · 2019: 54 · 2018: 62 · 2017: 50 · 2016: 51 · 2015: 54 · 2014: 65 · 2013: 68 · 2012: 66
FWCI
22.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Public Health Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Risks and Factors
Keywords
self-reported height, self-reported weight, body mass index, measurement validity, misclassification, anthropometry, middle-aged adults, prediction equations
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Body Height, Body Weight, England, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Obesity, Prospective Studies, Self Concept, Self Disclosure, Sex Factors, Reproducibility of Results, Cohort Studies, Body Mass Index, Statistics, Nonparametric

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