BMC medicine · 2023
Establishing international optimal cut-offs of waist-to-height ratio for predicting cardiometabolic risk in children and adolescents aged 6-18 years.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zong Xin'nan, Kelishadi Roya, Hong Young Mi, Schwandt Peter, Matsha Tandi E, Mill Jose G, Whincup Peter H, Pacifico Lucia, López-Bermejo Abel, Caserta Carmelo Antonio, Medeiros Carla Campos Muniz, Kollias Anastasios, Qorbani Mostafa, Jazi Fariborz Sharifian, Haas Gerda-Maria, de Oliveira Alvim Rafael, Zaniqueli Divanei, Chiesa Claudio, Bassols Judit, Romeo Elisabetta Lucia, de Carvalho Danielle Franklin, da Silva Simões Mônica Oliveira, Stergiou George S, Grammatikos Evangelos, Zhao Min, Magnussen Costan G, Xi Bo
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Waist-to-height ratio (WHtR) has been proposed as a simple and effective screening tool for assessing central obesity and cardiometabolic risk in both adult and pediatric populations. However, evidence suggests that the use of a uniform WHtR cut-off of 0.50 may not be universally optimal for pediatric populations globally. We aimed to determine the optimal cut-offs of WHtR in children and adolescents with increased cardiometabolic risk across different countries worldwide.
METHODS: We used ten population-based cross-sectional data on 24,605 children and adolescents aged 6-18 years from Brazil, China, Greece, Iran, Italy, Korea, South Africa, Spain, the UK, and the USA for establishing optimal WHtR cut-offs. We performed an external independent test (9,619 children and adolescents aged 6-18 years who came from other six countries) to validate the optimal WHtR cut-offs based on the predicting performance for at least two or three cardiometabolic risk factors.
RESULTS: Based on receiver operator characteristic curve analyses of various WHtR cut-offs to discriminate those with ≥ 2 cardiometabolic risk factors, the relatively optimal percentile cut-offs of WHtR in the normal weight subsample population in each country did not always coincide with a single fixed percentile, but varied from the 75th to 95th percentiles across the ten countries. However, these relatively optimal percentile values tended to cluster irrespective of sex, metabolic syndrome (MetS) criteria used, and WC measurement position. In general, using ≥ 2 cardiometabolic risk factors as the predictive outcome, the relatively optimal WHtR cut-off was around 0.50 in European and the US youths but was lower, around 0.46, in Asian, African, and South American youths. Secondary analyses that directly tested WHtR values ranging from 0.42 to 0.56 at 0.01 increments largely confirmed the results of the main analyses. In addition, the proposed cut-offs of 0.50 and 0.46 for two specific pediatric populations, respectively, showed a good performance in predicting ≥ 2 or ≥ 3 cardiometabolic risk factors in external independent test populations from six countries (Brazil, China, Germany, Italy, Korea, and the USA).
CONCLUSIONS: The proposed international WHtR cut-offs are easy and useful to identify central obesity and cardiometabolic risk in children and adolescents globally, thus allowing international comparison across populations.
METHODS: We used ten population-based cross-sectional data on 24,605 children and adolescents aged 6-18 years from Brazil, China, Greece, Iran, Italy, Korea, South Africa, Spain, the UK, and the USA for establishing optimal WHtR cut-offs. We performed an external independent test (9,619 children and adolescents aged 6-18 years who came from other six countries) to validate the optimal WHtR cut-offs based on the predicting performance for at least two or three cardiometabolic risk factors.
RESULTS: Based on receiver operator characteristic curve analyses of various WHtR cut-offs to discriminate those with ≥ 2 cardiometabolic risk factors, the relatively optimal percentile cut-offs of WHtR in the normal weight subsample population in each country did not always coincide with a single fixed percentile, but varied from the 75th to 95th percentiles across the ten countries. However, these relatively optimal percentile values tended to cluster irrespective of sex, metabolic syndrome (MetS) criteria used, and WC measurement position. In general, using ≥ 2 cardiometabolic risk factors as the predictive outcome, the relatively optimal WHtR cut-off was around 0.50 in European and the US youths but was lower, around 0.46, in Asian, African, and South American youths. Secondary analyses that directly tested WHtR values ranging from 0.42 to 0.56 at 0.01 increments largely confirmed the results of the main analyses. In addition, the proposed cut-offs of 0.50 and 0.46 for two specific pediatric populations, respectively, showed a good performance in predicting ≥ 2 or ≥ 3 cardiometabolic risk factors in external independent test populations from six countries (Brazil, China, Germany, Italy, Korea, and the USA).
CONCLUSIONS: The proposed international WHtR cut-offs are easy and useful to identify central obesity and cardiometabolic risk in children and adolescents globally, thus allowing international comparison across populations.