4.7 Article

Cutoff values for normal anthropometric variables in Asian Indian adults

Journal

DIABETES CARE
Volume 26, Issue 5, Pages 1380-1384

Publisher

AMER DIABETES ASSOC
DOI: 10.2337/diacare.26.5.1380

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE - Asian Indians have a high risk of developing glucose intolerance with small increments in their BMI. They generally have high upper-body adiposity, despite having a lean BMI. Therefore, this analysis was performed to find out the normal cutoff values for BMI and upper-body adiposity (waist circumference [WC] or waist-to-hip ratio [WHR]) by computing their risk associations with diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS - The risk of diabetes with stratified BMI, WC, or WHR was computed in 10,025 adults aged greater than or equal to20 years without a history of diabetes, and they were tested by oral glucose tolerance tests, using World Health Organization criteria. The calculations were performed separately in men and women using diabetes as the dependent variable versus normoglycemia (normal glucose tolerance) in multiple logistic regression analyses. Age-adjusted and stratified BMI, WC, or WHIZ were used as the independent variables, using the first stratum as the reference category. The upper limit of the stratum above which the risk association became statistically significant (P < 0.05) was considered to be the cutoff for normal values. RESULTS - Normal cutoff values for BMI was 23 kg/m(2) for both sexes. Cutoff values for WC were 85 and 80 cm for men and women, respectively; the corresponding WHRs were 0.88 and 0.81, respectively. Optimum sensitivity and specificity obtained from the receiver operator characteristic curve corresponded to these cutoff values. CONCLUSIONS - The cutoff value for normal BMI for men and women was 23 kg/m(2). The cutoff values for WC and WHIZ were lower in women than in men. The values were significantly lower compared with the corresponding values in white populations.

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