Cited by 36Obesity, Physical Activity, DietBody Composition Measurement TechniquesDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins

Joint association between body fat and its distribution with all-cause mortality: A data linkage cohort study based on NHANES (1988-2011)

Open access
Dong, Bin, Peng, Yang, Wang, Zhiqiang, Adegbija, Odewumi, Hu, Jie, Ma, Jun, Ma, Ying-Hua·2018·PLOS ONE

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Although obesity is recognized as an important risk of mortality, how the amount and distribution of body fat affect mortality risk is unclear. Furthermore, whether fat distribution confers any additional risk of mortality in addition to fat amount is not understood. METHODS: This data linkage cohort study included 16415 participants (8554 females) aged 18 to 89 years from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III (1988-1994) and its linked mortality data (31 December 2011). Cox proportional hazard models and parametric survival models were used to estimate the association between body fat percentage (BF%), based on bioelectrical impedance analysis, and waist-hip ratio (WHR) with mortality. RESULTS: A total of 4999 deaths occurred during 19-year follow-up. A U-shaped association between BF% and mortality was found in both sexes, with the adjusted hazard ratios for other groups between 1.02 (95% confidence interval: 0.89, 1.18) and 2.10 (1.47, 3.01) when BF% groups of 25-30% in males and 30-35% in females were used as references. A non-linear relationship between WHR and mortality was detected in males, with the adjusted hazard ratios among other groups ranging from 1.05 (0.94, 1.18) to 1.52 (1.15, 2.00) compared with the WHR category of 0.95-1.0. However in females, the death risk constantly increased across the WHR spectrum. Joint impact of BF% and WHR suggested males with BF% of 25-30% and WHR of 0.95-1.0 and females with BF% of 30-35% and WHR <0.9 were associated with the lowest mortality risk and longest survival age compared with their counterparts in other categories. CONCLUSIONS: This study supported the use of body fat distribution in addition to fat amount in assessing the risk of all-cause mortality.

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.0193368

Cites

27 of 28 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?

  • BMI estimates fat amount but is not precise in measuring fat distribution, such as abdominal fat or central fatness, which are better predictors of the risk of mortality.

    “As mentioned previously, BMI estimates fat amount but is not precise in measuring fat distribution, as with abdominal fat or central fatness, which are better predictors of the risk of mortality [50].”

    From Advantages and Limitations of the Body Mass Index (BMI) to Assess Adult Obesity (2024) · cites this paper as [50]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) says BMI cannot determine body-fat distribution, and the Discussion (page unavailable) says waist–hip ratio provides additional information about distribution and is associated with mortality. The paper does not establish that abdominal or central fatness measures are better predictors of mortality than BMI. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    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
Dong, B., Peng, Y., Wang, Z., Adegbija, O., Hu, J., Ma, J., & Ma, Y.-H.
Affiliations
  • Peking University (CN)
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
  • Institute for Urban Indigenous Health (AU)
Venue
PLOS ONE
Published
2018-02-23
Volume
13
Issue
2
Pages
e0193368
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2791036074
Cited by
36
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1
FWCI
3.57
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)
  • Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Health and Medical Research Council (APP1042343)
  • University of Queensland International Scholarship (44078179)
  • Excellent Talents Fund Program of Peking University Health Science Center (BMU2017YJ002)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Keywords
body fat percentage, body fat distribution, waist-to-hip ratio, all-cause mortality, obesity, U-shaped relationship, sex differences, bioelectrical impedance analysis, NHANES, mortality risk
MeSH terms
Adipose Tissue, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Mortality, Risk Factors, United States, Proportional Hazards Models, Electric Impedance, Waist-Hip Ratio, Body Fat Distribution, 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