The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Waist circumference action levels in the identification of cardiovascular risk factors: prevalence study in a random sample
Open accessAbstract
Objective: To determine the frequency of cardiovascular risk factors in people categorised by previously defined “action g126 levels” of waist circumference. Design: Prevalence study in a random population sample. Setting: Netherlands. Subjects: 2183 men and 2698 women aged 20-59 years selected at random from the civil registry of Amsterdam and Maastricht. Main outcome measures: Waist circumference, waist to hip ratio, body mass index (weight (kg)/height (m 2 )), total plasma cholesterol concentration, high density lipoprotein cholesterol concentration, blood pressure, age, and lifestyle. Results: A waist circumference exceeding 94 cm in men and 80 cm in women correctly identified subjects with body mass index of >/=25 and waist to hip ratios >/=0.95 in men and >/=0.80 in women with a sensitivity and specificity of >/=96%. Men and women with at least one cardiovascular risk factor (total cholesterol >/=6.5 mmol/l, high density lipoprotein cholesterol </=0.9 mmol/l, systolic blood pressure >/=160 mm Hg, diastolic blood pressure >/=95 mm Hg) were identified with sensitivities of 57% and 67% and specificities of 72% and 62% respectively. Compared with those with waist measurements below action levels, age and lifestyle adjusted odds ratios for having at least one risk factor were 2.2 (95% confidence interval 1.8 to 2.8) in men with a waist measurement of 94-102 cm and 1.6 (1.3 to 2.1) in women with a waist measurement of 80-88 cm. In men and women with larger waist measurements these age and lifestyle adjusted odds ratios were 4.6 (3.5 to 6.0) and 2.6 (2.0 to 3.2) respectively. Conclusions: Larger waist circumference identifies people at increased cardiovascular risks.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
Waist circumference as a measure for indicating need for weight management
Lean, M. E. J., Han, T. S., & Morrison, C. E. (1995) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.311.6998.158 · Cited by 1,869
Self-citationObesity, Fat Distribution, and Weight Gain as Risk Factors for Clinical Diabetes in Men
Chan, J. M., Rimm, E. B., Colditz, G. A., Stampfer, M. J., & Willett, W. C. (1994) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/diacare.17.9.961 · Cited by 1,808
Cited by
Alberti, K. G. M. M., Zimmet, P., & Shaw, J. (2006) · Diabetic Medicine · doi:10.1111/j.1464-5491.2006.01858.x · Cited by 6,597
Kopelman, P. G. (2000) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35007508 · Cited by 4,795
Subcutaneous and visceral adipose tissue: their relation to the metabolic syndrome
Wajchenberg, B. L. (2000) · Endocrine Reviews · doi:10.1210/edrv.21.6.0415 · Cited by 2,961
Park, Y.-W., Zhu, S., Palaniappan, L., Heshka, S., Carnethon, M. R., & Heymsfield, S. B. (2003) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.163.4.427 · Cited by 2,074
(2002) · PubMed · Cited by 1,755
Metadata
- Authors
- Han, T. S., van Leer, E. M., Seidell, J. C., & Lean, M. E. J.
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 1995-11-25
- Volume
- 311
- Issue
- 7017
- Pages
- 1401-1405
- ISSN
- 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- 1468-5833
- OpenAlex
- W2015605491
- Cited by
- 976
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 6.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
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.