Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 189

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

THE SECOND NATIONAL HEALTH AND NUTRITION EXAMINATION SURVEY 1976%1980

MARKS, GEOFFREY C., HABICHT, JEAN-PIERRE, MUELLER, WILLIAM H.·1989·American Journal of Epidemiology

Abstract

The components of reliability for eight anthropometric measures were studied in 95 male and 134 female subjects from the Second National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES II). The contributions to unreliability variance (Sr2) that occur as a result of measuring errors (Sp2, imprecision variance) and of intrasubject fluctuations in a measurement due to physiologic factors (Sd2, undependability) were estimated (Sr2 = Sp2 + Sd2). Unreliability was then related to the between-subject variance (S2) to estimate the reliability (R = 1 - (Sr2/S2)) of the measurement. Four of the anthropometric measurements (weight, height, sitting height, and arm circumference) had reliabilities in excess of R = 0.97. In the first three of these, measurement imprecision made up two thirds or less of unreliability, and undependability (Sd2) was stable by two weeks. Lesser but still acceptable reliabilities were obtained for triceps and subscapular skinfolds, bitrochanteric breadth, and elbow breadth (R = 0.81-0.95). For these variables imprecision (Sp2) was the major source of error. Furthermore, the unreliability (Sr2) between observers was twice as high or more than the unreliability within observers for these variables, evidence that imprecision (Sp2) is the single most important source of unreliability in these anthropometric measurements. Unreliability standard deviations of skinfolds increased in a linear manner with skinfold thickness corresponding to an unreliability coefficient of variation of 13-19 per cent. None of the other measurements showed such scale effects. Analyses of the kind suggested will help epidemiologists decide whether reliability can be increased by improving precision, and whether there is a need to improve reliability in the first place. Reliability appears to be adequate for all anthropometry in the NHANES II.

Overview

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 · 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a115372

Cites

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cited by

See all 189

Metadata

Authors
MARKS, G. C., HABICHT, J.-P., & MUELLER, W. H.
Venue
American Journal of Epidemiology
Published
1989-09
Volume
130
Issue
3
Pages
578-587
ISSN
  • 0002-9262 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-6256
OpenAlex
W2343197212
Cited by
189
References
0
FWCI
10.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: THE SECOND NATIONAL HEALTH AND NUTRITION EXAMINATION SURVEY 1976%1980. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a115372
The paper
MARKS, G. C., HABICHT, J.-P., & MUELLER, W. H. (1989). THE SECOND NATIONAL HEALTH AND NUTRITION EXAMINATION SURVEY 1976%1980. American Journal of Epidemiology. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a115372

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.