Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sonnenschein, E. G.
Right arrow Articles by Toniolo, P. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Sonnenschein, E. G.
Right arrow Articles by Toniolo, P. G.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

American Journal of Epidemiology Vol. 138, No. 5: 301-309
Copyright © 1993 by The Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health

research-article

Sources of Variability in Waist and Hip Measurements in Middle-aged Women

Elizabeth G. Sonnenschein1,, Mimi Y. Kim1, Bernard S. Pasternack1,2 and Paolo G. Toniolo1,2

1Institute of Environmental Medicine, New York University Medical Center New York, NY
2Kaplan Comprehensive Cancer Center, New York University Medical Center New York, NY

Reprint requests to Dr. Elizabeth Sonnenschein, Department of Environmental Medicine, New York University Medical Center, 341 East 25th Street, New York, NY 10010

The reliability of single measurements of waist and hip circumference and the ratio of waist circumference to hip circumference (a widely used measure of body fat distribution) has not been fully examined. The authors analyzed measurements of waist and hip circumference, as well as self-reported weight and height, repeated 3–6 times between 1986 and 1991 among 1,851 participants in the New York University Women's Health Study. Quetelet index (weight (kg)/height (m)2) was positively correlated with waist circumference (r = 0.88), hip circumference (r = 0.89), and waist/hip ratio (r = 0.52). Mean weight was positively correlated with the within-subject variance of waist circumference (r = 0.27) and, to a lesser degree, with the within-subject variance of hip circumference (r = 0.08) and waist/hip ratio (r = 0.10). The within-subject variance of weight was positively correlated with the within-subject variance of waist (r = 0.30) and hip (r = 0.23) measurements, and less so with waist/hip ratio (r = 0.05). Intraclass correlations for waist, hip, and waist/hip ratio were 0.89, 0.81, and 0.74, respectively; adjustment for Quetelet index reduced the intraclass correlations for waist and hip measures by 33% and 48%, respectively. Such adjustment can provide a more realistic determination of the reliability associated with an exposure variable in the design and analysis of studies investigating the relation between body fat distribution and disease. Am J Epidemiol 1993;138:301–9.

anthropometry; body composition; body mass index; reproducibility of results; women


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Nutr.Home page
J. Bigaard, I. Spanggaard, B. L. Thomsen, K. Overvad, and A. Tjonneland;
Self-Reported and Technician-Measured Waist Circumferences Differ in Middle-Aged Men and Women
J. Nutr., September 1, 2005; 135(9): 2263 - 2270.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.