The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Trends in national and state-level obesity in the USA after correction for self-report bias: analysis of health surveys.
Abstract
Objectives: To quantify population-level bias in self-reported weight and height as a function of age, sex, and the mode of self-report, and to estimate unbiased trends in national and state level obesity in the USA. Design: Statistical analysis of repeated cross-sectional health examination surveys (the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey [NHANES]) and health surveys (the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System [BRFSS]) in the USA. Setting: The 50 states of the USA and the District of Columbia. Results: In the USA, on average, women underreported their weight, but men did not. Young and middle-aged (565 years) adult men over-reported their height more than women of the same age. In older age groups, over-reporting of height was similar in men and women. Population-level bias in self-reported weight was larger in telephone interviews (BRFSS) than in-person interviews (NHANES). Except in older adults, height was over-reported more often in telephone interviews than in-person interviews. Using corrected weight and height in the year 2000, Mississippi (31%) and Texas (30%) had the highest prevalence of obesity for men; Texas (37%), Louisiana (37%), Mississippi (37%), District of Columbia (37%), Alabama (37%), and South Carolina (36%) for women. Conclusions: Population-level bias in self-reported weight and height is larger in telephone interviews than in-person interviews. Telephone interviews are a low-cost method for regular, nationally- and sub-nationally representative monitoring of obesity. It is possible to obtain corrected estimates of trends and geographical distributions of obesity from telephone interviews by using systematic analysis which measure weight and height from an independent sample of the same population.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Despite the availability of interventions, blood pressure and tobacco smoking decline in the US have stagnated or even reversed [39],[59], and there has been a steady increase in overweight–obesity [60].”
From The Preventable Causes of Death in the United States: Comparative Risk Assessment of Dietary, Lifestyle, and Metabolic Risk Factors (2009) · cites this paper as [60]
Citations
Cites
Prevalence and trends in obesity among US adults, 1999–2000
Flegal, K. M. (2002) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.288.14.1723 · Cited by 6,190
Actual Causes of Death in the United States, 2000
Mokdad, A. H. (2004) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.291.10.1238 · Cited by 5,211
Ezzati, M., López, A. D., Rodgers, A., & Murray, C. J. L. (2004) · Cited by 3,319
Self-citationExcess Deaths Associated With Underweight, Overweight, and Obesity
Flegal, K. M. (2005) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.293.15.1861 · Cited by 2,811
The Continuing Epidemics of Obesity and Diabetes in the United States
Mokdad, A. H. (2001) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.286.10.1195 · Cited by 2,730
The Spread of the Obesity Epidemic in the United States, 1991-1998
Mokdad, A. H. (1999) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.282.16.1519 · Cited by 2,384
Design, characteristics, and usefulness of state-based behavioral risk factor surveillance: 1981-87.
Remington, P., Smith, M. Y., Williamson, D. F., Anda, R. F., Gentry, E. M., & Hogelin, G. C. (1988) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 424
Accuracy of Self‐Reported Height and Weight in Women: An Integrative Review of the Literature
Engstrom, J. L., Paterson, S., Doherty, A., Trabulsi, M., & Speer, K. L. (2003) · Journal of Midwifery & Women s Health · doi:10.1016/s1526-9523(03)00281-2 · Cited by 392
The validity of self-reported weight in US adults: a population based cross-sectional study
Villanueva, E. (2001) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/1471-2458-1-11 · Cited by 336
Bias in reported body weight as a function of education, occupation, health and weight concern
Jeffery, R. W. (1996) · Addictive Behaviors · doi:10.1016/0306-4603(95)00050-x · Cited by 161
Validity of self-reported weight: a study of urban brazilian adults
Schmidt, M. I., Duncan, B. B., Tavares, M., Polanczyk, C. A., Pellanda, L. C., & Zimmer, P. M. (1993) · Revista de Saúde Pública · doi:10.1590/s0034-89101993000400007 · Cited by 87
Trends in Body Mass Index in Developing Countries
Pelletier, D. L., & Rahn, M. (1998) · Food and Nutrition Bulletin · doi:10.1177/156482659801900305 · Cited by 45
Accuracy of self-reported body weight: Stepped Approach Model component assessment
Black, D. R., Taylor, A. M., & Coster, D. C. (1998) · Health Education Research · doi:10.1093/her/13.2.301 · Cited by 40
The validity of self-reported height and weight in perimenopausal women.
Zhang, J., Feldblum, P. J., & Fortney, J. A. (1993) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.83.7.1052-b · Cited by 23
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)11403-6 · DOI · Paper page
- National Center for Health Statistics., 1994, Vital Health Stat, 32, 1
- 10.1016/S0002-8223(01)00008-6 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/9781118032619 · DOI
- Objectives and design of the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System., 1998, Proceedings Of The Section On Survey Methods, American Statistical Association National Meeting, 1998, Dallas, Texas.
- Remington P.L., 1988, Public Health Rep, 103, 366
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Ng, M., Fleming, T., Robinson, M., Thomson, B., Graetz, N., Margono, C., Mullany, E. C., Biryukov, S., Abbafati, C., Abera, S. F., et al. (2014) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(14)60460-8 · Cited by 11,952
Danaei, G., Ding, E. L., Mozaffarian, D., Taylor, B., Rehm, J., Murray, C. J. L., & Ezzati, M. (2009) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000058 · Cited by 2,860
Self-citationA century of trends in adult human height
NCD Risk Factor Collaboration (NCD-RisC) (2016) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.13410 · Cited by 1,558
Self-citationHealth metrics and evaluation: strengthening the science
Murray, C. J., & Frenk, J. (2008) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(08)60526-7 · Cited by 849
Self-citationMurray, C. J. L., Kulkarni, S. C., Michaud, C., Tomijima, N., Bulzacchelli, M. T., Iandiorio, T. J., & Ezzati, M. (2006) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0030260 · Cited by 762
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Ezzati, M., Martin, H., Skjold, S., Hoorn, S. V., & Murray, C. J. L.
- Affiliations
- Harvard University (US)
- Initiative for Global Health, Harvard University, Cambridge, USA
- Clinical Trials Research Unit, University of Auckland, New Zealand
- Harvard School of Public Health, Boston
- Corresponding author
- Ezzati, Majid
- ORCID
- Ezzati, Majid
- Venue
- Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2006-05
- Volume
- 99
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 250-257
- ISSN
- 0141-0768 (ISSN-L)
- 1758-1095
- OpenAlex
- W4322694598
- Cited by
- 170
- References
- 14
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 19
- FWCI
- 11.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
- National Institute on Aging
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
- Keywords
- obesity prevalence, self-report bias, self-reported weight, self-reported height, measurement error correction, telephone interviews, face-to-face interviews, sex differences, age differences, obesity trends, NHANES, Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, obesity surveillance
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