↓ Skip to main content

Assessing cardiometabolic risk in middle-aged adults using body mass index and waist–height ratio: are two indices better than one? A cross-sectional study

Overview of attention for article published in Diabetology & Metabolic Syndrome, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Assessing cardiometabolic risk in middle-aged adults using body mass index and waist–height ratio: are two indices better than one? A cross-sectional study
Published in
Diabetology & Metabolic Syndrome, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13098-015-0069-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Seán R. Millar, Ivan J. Perry, Catherine M. Phillips

Abstract

A novel obesity classification method has been proposed using body mass index (BMI) and waist-height ratio (WHtR) together. However, the utility of this approach is unclear. In this study we compare the metabolic profiles in subjects defined as overweight or obese by both measures. We examine a range of metabolic syndrome features, pro-inflammatory cytokines, acute-phase response proteins, coagulation factors and white blood cell counts to determine whether a combination of both indices more accurately identifies individuals at increased obesity-related cardiometabolic risk. This was a cross-sectional study involving a random sample of 1856 men and women aged 46-73 years. Metabolic and anthropometric profiles were assessed. Linear and logistic regression analyses were used to compare lipid, lipoprotein, blood pressure, glycaemic and inflammatory biomarker levels between BMI and WHtR tertiles. Multinomial logistic regression was performed to determine cardiometabolic risk feature associations with BMI and WHtR groupings. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to evaluate index discriminatory ability. The combination of BMI and WHtR tertiles identified consistent metabolic variable differences relative to those characterised on the basis of one index. Similarly, odds ratios of having cardiometabolic risk features were noticeably increased in subjects classified as overweight or obese by both measures when compared to study participants categorised by either BMI or WHtR separately. Significant discriminatory improvement was observed for detecting individual cardiometabolic risk features and adverse biomarker levels. In a fully adjusted model, only individuals within the highest tertile for both indices displayed a significant and positive association with pre-diabetes, OR: 3.4 (95 % CI: 1.9, 6.0), P < 0.001. These data provide evidence that the use of BMI and WHtR together may improve body fat classification. Risk stratification using a composite index may provide a more accurate method for identifying high and low-risk subjects.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 48 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 21%
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Postgraduate 5 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 6%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 12 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 6%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Sports and Recreations 2 4%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 16 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 22 July 2016.
All research outputs
#7,688,890
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Diabetology & Metabolic Syndrome
#237
of 796 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,781
of 279,002 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diabetology & Metabolic Syndrome
#7
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 796 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
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 279,002 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.