4.6 Article

Anthropometric markers for detection of the metabolic syndrome in adolescents

期刊

DIABETES & METABOLISM
卷 41, 期 2, 页码 138-144

出版社

MASSON EDITEUR
DOI: 10.1016/j.diabet.2014.07.001

关键词

Metabolic syndrome; Insulin resistance; Cardiovascular risk; Obesity; Adolescent; Waist circumference; Waist circumference/height ratio; BMI

资金

  1. Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research of Algeria

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives. - This study aimed to estimate, in a large group of Algerian adolescents, the prevalence of the metabolic syndrome (MetS), using four definitions (by Cook, De Ferranti, Viner and the IDF), and to test the validity of unique thresholds of waist circumference, waist/height ratio and BMI in screening for the MetS regardless of the definition used. Subjects and methods. - A total of 1100 adolescent students, aged 12-18 y, were randomly selected from schools and classrooms in the city of Constantine; all had anthropometric measurements taken and 989 had blood tests. Results. - Prevalences of the MetS were: 2.6% for boys and 0.6% for girls by the Cook definition; 4.0% for boys and 2.0% for girls by the De Ferranti definition; 0.7% for boys and 0% for girls by the Viner definition; and 1.3% for boys and 0.5% for girls by the 2007 TDF definition. Prevalences ranged from 3.7% to 13.0% in obese adolescents. Unique thresholds, independent of gender, age and height, of 80 cm for waist circumference, 0.50 for waist/height ratio and 25 kg/m(2) for BMI had sensitivities of 72-100%, 67-100% and 72-100%, respectively, and specificities of 74-78%, 74-86% and 74-78%, respectively, depending on the MetS definition used. Conclusion. - The MetS is present in Algerian adolescents and the prevalence is especially high in obese young people. Our thresholds for waist circumference, waist/height ratio and BMI for screening for the MetS should now be tested in other adolescent populations. (c) 2014 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据