Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 724

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Accuracy of Teen and Parental Reports of Obesity and Body Mass Index

Goodman, Elizabeth, Hinden, Beth R., Khandelwal, Seema·2000·Pediatrics
DOI 10.1542/peds.106.1.52
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objectives.: Adolescent obesity is becoming an increasing public health problem. This study determines: 1) differences in teen and parental report of obesity, 2) amount of misclassification using body mass index (BMI) from self-reported versus measured height and weight as an indicator of obesity, and 3) whether misclassification varies by gender and socioeconomic status. Design.: Weighted data from 15 483 baseline (T1) youth and parental interviews from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health were used. Seventy-four percent of teens were reinterviewed 1 year later (T2). Parents reported socioeconomic status indicators and whether their teen was obese. Teens reported height, weight, and weight perception. BMI was calculated from both self-reported height and weight at T1 and T2 and from measured height and weight at T2. Those with a BMI ≥95% corrected for age and gender were considered obese. Results.: At T1, nearly one half of teens (47%) reporting they were very overweight were not obese by BMI. For teens obese by BMI, 19.6% were reported to be obese by both parent and teen, 6.4% by teen only, 29.9% by parent only, and 44.2% by neither teen nor parent. For those with persistent obesity, teen and/or parental report failed to identify more than one third (34%) as obese; 23.4% were identified by both teen and parent report, 5.4% by teen report only, and 37.2% by parent only. At T2, the correlation between BMI calculated from self-reported versus measured height and weight for the overall population was very strong (r = .92). Specificity of obesity status based on self-reported BMI, compared with obesity status based on measured BMI was .996; sensitivity, .722; positive predictive value, .860; and negative predictive value, .978. Overall, 3.8% of teens were misclassified using self-report measures. Girls were no more likely than boys to be misclassified as obese using BMI from self-reported height and weight. Conclusions.: Parental report is a better indicator of obesity than teen report of weight status, but parental and teen reports are both poor predictors of adolescent obesity. Using BMI based on self-reported height and weight correctly classified 96% as to obesity status. Thus, studies can use self-reported height and weight to understand teen obesity and its correlates/sequelae.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1542/peds.106.1.52

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 1 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Goodman, E., Hinden, B. R., & Khandelwal, S.
Venue
Pediatrics
Publisher
American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)
Published
2000-07-01
Volume
106
Issue
1
Pages
52-58
ISSN
  • 0031-4005 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-4275
DOI
10.1542/peds.106.1.52
OpenAlex
W2003464438
Cited by
724
References
1
FWCI
14.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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.