Premium
Weighting the Weights: Agreement among Anthropometric Indicators Identifying the Weight Status of People with Intellectual Disabilities
Author(s) -
Verstraelen C. J. F.,
Maaskant M. A.,
Van KnijffRaeven A. G. M.,
Curfs L. M. G.,
Van Schrojenstein Lantman– de Valk H. M. J.
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
journal of applied research in intellectual disabilities
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.056
H-Index - 63
eISSN - 1468-3148
pISSN - 1360-2322
DOI - 10.1111/j.1468-3148.2008.00463.x
Subject(s) - bioelectrical impedance analysis , waist , circumference , body mass index , anthropometry , underweight , medicine , physical therapy , tape measure , mass index , skinfold thickness , overweight , mathematics , geometry
Background The aims of this study were (1) to determine to what extent body mass index (BMI), waist circumference, fat free mass index (FFMI) and skinfold thickness are feasible measurement options in people with intellectual disabilities (ID) to measure their weight status, and (2) to assess the level of agreement among these methods. Methods BMI, waist circumference, FFMI derived from the Bioelectrical Impedance Analyser and skinfold thickness were all determined in 76 people with intellectual disabilities. Results BMI and waist circumference could be measured in all subjects. Skinfold thickness and FFMI failed in, respectively, five and 14 people. In general, intertest reliabilities were low. For underweight people, the agreement was acceptable. Conclusions BMI and waist circumference were feasible measurement options. Agreements among the methods were low. Implications of these results are discussed.