| Title |
Association of body mass index with chronic pain prevalence: a large population-based cross-sectional study in Japan
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Anesthesia, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00540-018-2486-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Keiko Yamada, Yasuhiko Kubota, Hiroyasu Iso, Hiroyuki Oka, Junji Katsuhira, Ko Matsudaira |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study was to examine the association between body mass index and chronic pain. The outcome was chronic pain prevalence by body mass index (BMI). BMIs of less than 18.5, 18.5-25.0, 25.0-30.0, and 30.0 or over kg/m2were defined as underweight, normal weight, overweight, and obese. We used data from 4993 participants (2464 men and 2529 women aged 20-79 years) of the Pain Associated Cross-sectional Epidemiological survey in Japan. Sex-stratified multivariable-adjusted odds ratios were calculated with 95% confidence intervals using a logistic regression model including age, smoking, exercise, sleep time, monthly household expenditure, and presence of severe depression. We analyzed all ages and age subgroups, 20-49 and 50-79 years. The prevalence of chronic pain was higher among underweight, overweight, and obese male respondents than those reporting normal weight, with multivariable odds ratios of 1.52 (1.03-2.25), 1.55 (1.26-1.91), and 1.71 (1.12-2.60). According to underweight, only older men showed higher prevalence of chronic pain than normal weight men with odd ratios, 2.19 (1.14-4.20). Being overweight and obese were also associated with chronic pain in women; multivariable odds ratios were 1.48 (1.14-1.93) and 2.09 (1.20-3.64). Being underweight was not associated with chronic pain. There was a U-shaped association between BMI and chronic pain prevalence among men ≥ 50 years, and a dose-response association among women. Our finding suggests that underweight should be considered in older men suffering chronic pain. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 71 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 8% |
| Researcher | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 10 | 14% |
| Unknown | 29 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 17% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 15% |
| Psychology | 6 | 8% |
| Sports and Recreations | 4 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Unknown | 31 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 March 2018.
All research outputs
#20,469,520
of 23,028,364 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Anesthesia
#701
of 825 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#291,736
of 330,380 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Anesthesia
#9
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,028,364 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 825 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,380 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.