1. Efficacy of anthropometric measures for identifying cardiovascular disease risk in adolescents: review and meta-analysis.
- Author
-
Lichtenauer, M, Wheatley, SD, Martyn-St James, M, Duncan, MJ, Cobayashi, F, Berg, G, Musso, C, Graffigna, M, Soutelo, J, Bovet, P, Kollias, A, Stergiou, GS, Grammatikos, E, Griffiths, C, Ingle, L, Jung, C, Lichtenauer, M, Wheatley, SD, Martyn-St James, M, Duncan, MJ, Cobayashi, F, Berg, G, Musso, C, Graffigna, M, Soutelo, J, Bovet, P, Kollias, A, Stergiou, GS, Grammatikos, E, Griffiths, C, Ingle, L, and Jung, C
- Abstract
INTRODUCTION: To compare the ability of Body Mass Index (BMI), waist circumference (WC) and waist to height ratio (WHtR) to estimate cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk levels in adolescents. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed after a database search for relevant literature (Cochrane, Centre for Review and Dissemination, PubMed, British Nursing Index, CINAHL, BIOSIS citation index, ChildData, metaRegister). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The study included 117 records representing 96 studies with 994,595 participants were included in the systematic review, 14 of which (13 studies, N.=14,610) were eligible for the meta-analysis. The results of the meta-analysis showed that BMI was a strong indicator of systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, triglycerides, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and insulin; but not total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein or glucose. Few studies were eligible for inclusion in the meta-analysis considering WC or WHtR (N.≤2). The narrative synthesis found measures of central adiposity to be consistently valid indicators of the same risk factors as BMI. CONCLUSIONS: BMI was an indicator of CVD risk. WC and WHtR were efficacious for indicating the same risk factors BMI performed strongly for, though there was insufficient evidence to judge the relative strength of each measure possibly due to heterogeneity in the methods for measuring and classifying WC.
- Published
- 2018