Cited by 554Body Composition Measurement TechniquesObesity, Physical Activity, DietDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins

Measuring adiposity in patients: the utility of body mass index (BMI), percent body fat, and leptin

Open access
Shah, Nirav R., Braverman, Eric R.·2012·PLoS ONE

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Obesity is a serious disease that is associated with an increased risk of diabetes, hypertension, heart disease, stroke, and cancer, among other diseases. The United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates a 20% obesity rate in the 50 states, with 12 states having rates of over 30%. Currently, the body mass index (BMI) is most commonly used to determine adiposity. However, BMI presents as an inaccurate obesity classification method that underestimates the epidemic and contributes to failed treatment. In this study, we examine the effectiveness of precise biomarkers and duel-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) to help diagnose and treat obesity. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: A cross-sectional study of adults with BMI, DXA, fasting leptin and insulin results were measured from 1998-2009. Of the participants, 63% were females, 37% were males, 75% white, with a mean age = 51.4 (SD = 14.2). Mean BMI was 27.3 (SD = 5.9) and mean percent body fat was 31.3% (SD = 9.3). BMI characterized 26% of the subjects as obese, while DXA indicated that 64% of them were obese. 39% of the subjects were classified as non-obese by BMI, but were found to be obese by DXA. BMI misclassified 25% men and 48% women. Meanwhile, a strong relationship was demonstrated between increased leptin and increased body fat. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Our results demonstrate the prevalence of false-negative BMIs, increased misclassifications in women of advancing age, and the reliability of gender-specific revised BMI cutoffs. BMI underestimates obesity prevalence, especially in women with high leptin levels (>30 ng/mL). Clinicians can use leptin-revised levels to enhance the accuracy of BMI estimates of percentage body fat when DXA is unavailable.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0033308

Cites

40 of 40 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?

  • The overweight BMI range included men with a low estimated body fat as well as men whose body fat percentage is compatible with obesity.

    “Hence, the “overweight” range included men with a low estimated body fat as well as men whose body fat percentage is compatible with obesity [33].”

    From Advantages and Limitations of the Body Mass Index (BMI) to Assess Adult Obesity (2024) · cites this paper as [33]

    The Results (Table 2; page unavailable) report men with BMI below the obesity cutoff whose body-fat percentage met the obesity criterion, and Table 4 shows that BMI cutoffs within the overweight range do not cleanly separate obese from non-obese body-fat levels. The copy does not establish that men specifically in the overweight BMI range had *low* estimated body fat; its relevant category is the broader “non-obese” body-fat category. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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
Shah, N. R., & Braverman, E. R.
Affiliations
  • New York University (US)
  • Weill Cornell Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
Braverman, Eric R.
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2012-04-02
Volume
7
Issue
4
Pages
e33308
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2163362890
Cited by
554
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 39 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 45 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 52 · 2017: 45 · 2016: 38 · 2015: 50 · 2014: 41 · 2013: 37 · 2012: 14
FWCI
30.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • New York State Department of Health
  • Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (R01HS018589, 1r01hs018589-01)
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
obesity, body mass index, body fat percentage, leptin, adiposity measurement, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Cross-Sectional Studies, False Negative Reactions, Female, Humans, Insulin, Male, Middle Aged, Obesity, ROC Curve, Absorptiometry, Photon, Body Mass Index, Leptin, Adiposity, Young Adult

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