Back

How to measure obesity in public health research? Problems with using BMI for population inference

Visokay, A.; Hoffman, K.; Salerno, S.; McCormick, T. H.; Johfre, S.

2025-04-03 public and global health
10.1101/2025.04.01.25325037 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundThough viewed as problematic for measuring individual-level adiposity, Body Mass Index (BMI) is often considered "good enough" for population inference and epidemiological research. However, we demonstrate that BMI produces statistically invalid population-level estimates of associations between key demographic risk factors (e.g., self-reported sex, race, age) and obesity when compared to more direct adiposity measurements. Further, we demonstrate how novel statistical calibration techniques can enable more valid population inference using widely available BMI data alongside a limited subset of "gold standard" measurements. MethodsUsing National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data (2011-2023), we compare associations, broken down by demographic groups, across three different purported adiposity measures: BMI, Waist Circumference (WC), and whole-body total fat percentage from Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans. We then apply a statistical procedure for conducting inference on predicted data to calibrate BMI-based prevalence estimates toward the "gold standard" DXA-based measurements, allowing for valid population inference even for time periods where only BMI data are available. FindingsBMI-measured adiposity yields substantially different - and often contradictory - conclusions about the association between obesity status and lifestyle factors compared to the more direct, DXA-based measurements. Most concerning, the directions and magnitudes of the associations between racial groups may differ depending on whether BMI or DXA-based measurements are used. Similarly, self-reported sex-based differences in obesity prevalence show opposite patterns across measurement types. Our validation results confirm that our calibration method overcomes this challenge and successfully approximates DXA-based associations using primarily BMI-based measurements. InterpretationOur study provides empirical evidence that uncorrected BMI-based inference leads to invalid population-level estimates about the associations between obesity status and key predictors. The statistical calibration approach we present offers a practical solution for obesity researchers who must rely on BMI or similar anthropometric measures due to cost or data availability constraints, enabling more valid population inference without requiring comprehensive "gold standard" adiposity measurements.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
International Journal of Obesity
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
33.5%
2
American Journal of Epidemiology
57 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.5%
3
Obesity
19 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.9%
4
International Journal of Epidemiology
74 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.5%
50% of probability mass above
5
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.9%
6
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 33%
4.4%
7
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 35%
2.1%
8
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.9%
9
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
10
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
11
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
19 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
12
Social Science & Medicine
15 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.5%
13
Current Developments in Nutrition
15 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.2%
14
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 57%
1.1%
15
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 70%
0.9%
16
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 12%
0.9%
17
Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism
17 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
18
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
19
BMJ Nutrition, Prevention & Health
10 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
20
Public Health Nutrition
14 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
21
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
22
BMC Medical Research Methodology
43 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
23
Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
32 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
24
Cureus
67 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
25
Diabetologia
36 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.7%
26
Frontiers in Pediatrics
29 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.7%
27
Trials
25 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
28
SSM - Population Health
17 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.7%
29
Annals of Epidemiology
19 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.7%
30
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.5%