4.7 Article

Ethnic-Specific BMI and Waist Circumference Thresholds

Journal

OBESITY
Volume 19, Issue 6, Pages 1272-1278

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/oby.2010.319

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Pennington Biomedical Research Center
  2. Louisiana Public Facilities Authority Endowed Chair in Nutrition
  3. John W. Barton Sr. Chair in Genetics and Nutrition
  4. Douglas L. Gordon Chair in Diabetes and Metabolism

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BMI and waist circumference (WC) are used to identify individuals with elevated obesity-related health risks. The current thresholds were derived largely in populations of European origin. This study determined optimal BMI and WC thresholds for the identification of cardiometabolic risk among white and African-American (AA) adults. The sample included 2,096 white women, 1,789 AA women, 1,948 white men, and 643 AA men aged 18-64 years. Elevated cardiometabolic risk was defined as >= 2 risk factors (blood pressure >= 130/85 mm Hg; glucose >= 100 mg/dl; triglycerides >= 150 mg/dl; high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol < 40 mg/dl (men) or < 50 mg/dl (women)). Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves were used to identify optimal BMI and WC thresholds in each sex-by-ethnicity group. The optimal BMI thresholds were 30 kg/m(2) in white women, 32.9 kg/m(2) in AA women, 29.1 kg/m(2) white men, and 30.4 kg/m(2) in AA men, whereas optimal WC thresholds were 91.9 cm in white women, 96.8 cm in AA women, 99.4 in white men, and 99.1 cm in AA men. The sensitivities at the optimal thresholds ranged from 63.5 to 68.5% for BMI and 68.4 to 71.0% for WC and the specificities ranged from 64.2 to 68.8% for BMI and from 68.5 to 71.0% for WC, respectively. In general, the optimal BMI and WC thresholds approximated currently used thresholds in men and in white women. There are no apparent ethnic differences in men; however, in AA women the optimal BMI and WC values are similar to 3 kg/m(2) and 5 cm higher than in white women.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available