Next Article in Journal
Associations of Cough Prevalence with Ambient Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons, Nitrogen and Sulphur Dioxide: A Longitudinal Study
Previous Article in Journal
Particulate Matter in Second-Hand Smoke Emitted from Different Cigarette Sizes and Types of the Brand Vogue Mainly Smoked by Women
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2016, 13(8), 801; doi:10.3390/ijerph13080801

Comparison of the Combined Obesity Indices to Predict Cardiovascular Diseases Risk Factors and Metabolic Syndrome in Northeast China

1
Epidemiology and Biostatistics School of Public Health, NO. 1163 Xinmin Street, Jilin University, Changchun 130021, China
2
Department of Immunization Program, Changchun Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Changchun 130021, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Paul B. Tchounwou
Received: 14 June 2016 / Revised: 28 July 2016 / Accepted: 2 August 2016 / Published: 9 August 2016
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [741 KB, uploaded 9 August 2016]   |  

Abstract

Background: Obesity is associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors (hypertension, dyslipidemia and diabetes) and metabolic syndrome (MetS), and it may be flawed that most studies only use one obesity index to predict these risk factors. Therefore, our study aims to compare the various combined obesity indices systematically, and to find the optimal combined obesity indices to predict CVD risk factors and MetS. Methods: A total of 16,766 participants aged 18–79 years old were recruited in Jilin Province in 2012. Receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) curves and multiple logistic regressions were used to evaluate the predictive capacity of the combined obesity indices for CVD risk factors and MetS. Results: The adjusted area under receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) with two combined obesity indices had been improved up to 19.45%, compared with one single obesity index. In addition, body mass index (BMI) and waist circumference (WC) were the optimal combinations, where the AUROC (95% confidence interval (CI)) for hypertension, dyslipidemia, diabetes and MetS in males were 0.730 (0.718, 0.740), 0.694 (0.682, 0.706), 0.725 (0.709, 0.742) and 0.820 (0.810, 0.830), and in females were 0.790 (0.780, 0.799), 0.727 (0.717, 0.738), 0.746 (0.731, 0.761) and 0.828 (0.820, 0.837), respectively. Conclusions: The more abnormal obesity indices that one has the higher the risk for CVD risk factors and MetS, especially in males. In addition, the combined obesity indices have better predictions than one obesity index, where BMI and WC are the optimal combinations. View Full-Text
Keywords: obesity; cardiovascular diseases; metabolic syndrome; AUROC obesity; cardiovascular diseases; metabolic syndrome; AUROC
Figures

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).

Supplementary material

Scifeed alert for new publications

Never miss any articles matching your research from any publisher
  • Get alerts for new papers matching your research
  • Find out the new papers from selected authors
  • Updated daily for 49'000+ journals and 6000+ publishers
  • Define your Scifeed now

SciFeed Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Tao, Y.; Yu, J.; Tao, Y.; Pang, H.; Yu, Y.; Yu, Y.; Jin, L. Comparison of the Combined Obesity Indices to Predict Cardiovascular Diseases Risk Factors and Metabolic Syndrome in Northeast China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2016, 13, 801.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health EISSN 1660-4601 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top