Cited by 1,869Body Composition Measurement TechniquesObesity, Physical Activity, DietDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins

Waist circumference as a measure for indicating need for weight management

Open access
Lean, M E J, Han, T S, Morrison, C E·1995·BMJ

Abstract

Objective : To test the hypothesis that a single measurement, waist circumference, might be used to identify people at health risk both from being overweight and from having a central fat distribution. Design : A community derived random sample of men and women and a second, validation sample. Setting : North Glasgow. Subjects : 904 men and 1014 women (first sample); 86 men and 202 women (validation sample). Main outcome measures : Waist circumference, body mass index, waist:hip ratio. Results : Waist circumference >/=94 cm for men and >/=80 cm for women identified subjects with high body mass index (>/=25 kg/m 2 ) and those with lower body mass index but high waist:hip ratio (>/=0.95 for men, >/=0.80 women) with a sensitivity of >96% and specificity >97.5%. Waist circumference >/=102 cm for men or >/=88 cm for women identified subjects with body mass index >/=30 and those with lower body mass index but high waist:hip ratio with a sensitivity of >96% and specificity >98%, with only about 2% of the sample being misclassified. Conclusions : Waist circumference could be used in health promotion programmes to identify individuals who should seek and be offered weight management. Men with waist circumference >/=94 cm and women with waist circumference >/=80 cm should gain no further weight; men with waist circumference >/=102 cm and women with waist circumference >/=88 cm should reduce their weight.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmj.311.6998.158

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Self-check

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

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lean, M. E. J., Han, T. S., & Morrison, C. E.
Affiliations
  • Glasgow Royal Infirmary (GB)
  • University of Glasgow (GB)
Corresponding author
Lean, M E J
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
1995-07-15
Volume
311
Issue
6998
Pages
158-161
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
OpenAlex
W2066051121
Cited by
1,869
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 38 · 2025: 45 · 2024: 72 · 2023: 61 · 2022: 59 · 2021: 47 · 2020: 65 · 2019: 55 · 2018: 76 · 2017: 48 · 2016: 74 · 2015: 84 · 2014: 93 · 2013: 100 · 2012: 106
FWCI
8.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMJ (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Keywords
waist circumference, abdominal obesity, overweight, body mass index, waist-to-hip ratio, weight management, health risk identification, screening thresholds, sex differences, health promotion
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Anthropometry, Body Constitution, Body Weight, Female, Health Promotion, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Obesity, Body Mass Index

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