METHODS: Standardised anthropometric measurements were compared against the self-reported values from 5,132 adult residents in a cross-sectional, epidemiological survey. Discrepancies in self-reports from measurements were examined by comparing overall mean differences. Intraclass correlations, Cohen's kappa and Bland-Altman plots with limits of agreement, and sub-analysis by sex and ethnicity were also explored.
RESULTS: Data were obtained from 5,132 respondents. The mean age of respondents was 43.9 years. Overall, the height was overestimated (0.2cm), while there was an underestimation of weight (0.8kg) and derived BMI (0.4kg/m2). Women had a larger discrepancy in height (0.35cm, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.22 to 0.49), weight (-0.95kg, 95% CI -1.11 to -0.79) and BMI (-0.49kg/m2, 95% CI -0.57 to -0.41) compared with men. Height reporting bias was highest among Indians (0.28cm, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.44) compared with Chinese and Malays, while weight (-1.32kg, 95% CI -1.53 to -1.11) and derived BMI (-0.57kg/m2, 95% CI -0.67 to -0.47) showed higher degrees of underreporting among Malays compared with Chinese and Indians. Substantially high self-reported versus measured values were obtained for intraclass correlations (0.96-0.99, P<0.001) and kappa (0.74). For BMI categories, good to excellent kappa agreement was observed (0.68-0.81, P<0.0001).
CONCLUSION: Self-reported anthropometric estimates can be used, particularly in large epidemiological studies. However, sufficient care is needed when evaluating data from Indians, Malays and women as there is likely an underestimation of obesity prevalence.
METHODS AND STUDY DESIGN: This study had two phases: a cross-sectional growth study of under-five Orang Asli children (N=304; Phase 1) and a 2-year prospective cohort growth study of Orang Asli children aged 0-3 years (N=214; Phase 2) in the Temerloh district of Pahang, Malaysia. Weight-for-age, length/height-for-age, weight-for-length/height, and body mass index-for-age were determined.
RESULTS: The prevalence rates of stunting, underweight, wasting, and thinness in under-five Orang Asli children (Phase 1) were 64%, 49%, 14%, and 12%, respectively. In the cohort of 214 children (Phase 2), weight-for-age was initially documented and maintained closely at -1.50 standard deviations (SD) in the first 6 months, but it declined to approximately -2.00 SD at 15 months and remained close to -2.00 SD thereafter. Length/height-for-age declined rapidly to approximately -2.50 SD at 18 months and fluctuated between -2.30 and -2.50 SD thereafter. Weight-for-length/height increased sharply to -0.40 SD at 2-3 months, declined gradually to less than -1.00 SD at 12 months, and plateaued between -1.00 and -1.30 SD thereafter.
CONCLUSIONS: Undernutrition is prevalent among Orang Asli children, with length rather than weight faltering being more pronounced in the first 2 years of life. Identifying the causes of early growth retardation in this population is required to inform future preventive strategies.
AIMS: (1) To investigate the association between birth weight and anthropometric measurements during adulthood; (2) to study the genetic and environmental influences on body measures including birth weight, weight and height among twins; and (3) to assess the variation in heritability versus environment among two cohorts of twins who lived in different geographical areas.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Twins were collected from two twin registers. Data on birth weight, adult weight and height in 430 MZ and 170 DZ twins living in two geographically distinct parts of the world were collected. A genetic analysis was performed using MX software.
RESULTS: Birth weight was associated with weight, height and BMI. Both MZ and DZ twins with low birth weight had shorter height during their adult life (p = 0.001), but only MZ twins with lower birth weight were lighter at adulthood (p = 0.001). Intra-pair differences in birth weight were not associated with differences in adult height (p = 0.366) or weight (p = 0.796). Additive genetic effects accounted for 53% of the variance in weight, 43% in height and 55% in birth weight. The remaining variance was attributed to unique environmental effects (15% for weight, 13% for height and 45% for birth weight and only 16% for BMI). Variability was found to be different in the two cohorts. The best fitting model for birth weight and BMI was additive genetic and non-shared environment and for weight and height was additive genetic, non-shared environment (plus common Environment).
CONCLUSIONS: Data suggests that the association between weight at birth and anthropometric measures in later life is influenced by both genetic and environmental factors. Living in different environments can potentially relate to variation found in the environment.