Document Type
Journal Article
Publication Date
1-1-2016
Journal
PLoS ONE
Volume
11
Issue
3
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0150735
Keywords
Obesity--epidemiology
Abstract
BACKGROUND: State-level estimates from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) underestimate the obesity epidemic because they use self-reported height and weight. We describe a novel bias-correction method and produce corrected state-level estimates of obesity and severe obesity.
METHODS: Using non-parametric statistical matching, we adjusted self-reported data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) 2013 (n = 386,795) using measured data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) (n = 16,924). We validated our national estimates against NHANES and estimated bias-corrected state-specific prevalence of obesity (BMI≥30) and severe obesity (BMI≥35). We compared these results with previous adjustment methods.
RESULTS: Compared to NHANES, self-reported BRFSS data underestimated national prevalence of obesity by 16% (28.67% vs 34.01%), and severe obesity by 23% (11.03% vs 14.26%). Our method was not significantly different from NHANES for obesity or severe obesity, while previous methods underestimated both. Only four states had a corrected obesity prevalence below 30%, with four exceeding 40%-in contrast, most states were below 30% in CDC maps.
CONCLUSIONS: Twelve million adults with obesity (including 6.7 million with severe obesity) were misclassified by CDC state-level estimates. Previous bias-correction methods also resulted in underestimates. Accurate state-level estimates are necessary to plan for resources to address the obesity epidemic.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
APA Citation
Ward, Z., Long, M. W., Resch, S., Gortmaker, S., Cradock, A., Giles, C., Hsiao, A., & Wang, Y. (2016). Redrawing the US Obesity Landscape: Bias-Corrected Estimates of State-Specific Adult Obesity Prevalence.. PLoS ONE, 11 (3). http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0150735
Peer Reviewed
1
Open Access
1
Comments
Reproduced with permission of PLoS ONE.