Abstract
Aims
We sought to examine whether waist-to-thigh ratio (WTR) performed better than waist-to-height
ratio (WHtR), waist-to-hip ratio (WHpR), waist circumference (WC), or body mass index
(BMI) in relation to diabetes among US adults.
Methods
Data of 6277 men and nonpregnant women 20 years or older from the Third National Health
and Nutrition Examination Survey (1988–1994) were analyzed.
Results
In men, AUC of WTR (0.83) was larger than that of WHtR (0.78) (P = 0.003), WHpR (0.79) (P < 0.001), WC (0.76) (P < 0.001), and BMI (0.72) (P < 0.001) for diabetes. In women, the AUC of WTR (0.80) was similar to that of WHtR (0.80)
(P = 0.89), WHpR (0.79) (P = 0.55), and WC (0.78) (P = 0.36), but larger than that of BMI (0.73) (P = 0.03) for diabetes. After adjustment for potential confounders, WTR had the strongest
association with diabetes in men (OR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.57–2.88; per 1 SD increment),
whereas WHpR had the strongest association with diabetes in women (OR, 1.94; 95% CI,
1.60–2.35).
Conclusions
WTR performed better than other four indices in men and WTR performed similarly to
WHtR, WHpR, and waist circumference, but better than BMI in women for the association
with diabetes.
Abbreviations:
AUC (area under curve), BMI (body mass index), CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention), CI (confidence interval), CRP (C-reactive protein), NHANES (Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey), OR (odds ratio), SD (standard deviation), SE (standard error), WC (waist circumference), WHO (World Health Organization), WHpR (waist-to-hip ratio), WHtR (waist-to-height ratio), WTR (waist-to-thigh ratio)Keywords
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Diabetes Research and Clinical PracticeAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Waist circumference as a measure for indicating need for weight management.BMJ. 1995; 311: 158-161
- Ratio of waist circumference to height is strong predictor of intra-abdominal fat.BMJ. 1996; 313: 559-560
- Assessment of intra-abdominal and subcutaneous abdominal fat: relation between anthropometry and computed tomography.Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 1987; 45: 7-13
- Female fat distribution-a simple classification based on two circumference measurements.Int. J. Obes. 1982; 6: 143-152
- Choosing an index for abdominal obesity: an opportunity for epidemiologic clarification.J. Clin. Epidemiol. 1993; 46: 491-494
- Which measure of body fat distribution is best for epidemiologic research?.Am. J. Epidemiol. 1991; 133: 858-869
- Comparison of body size measurements as predictors of NIDDM in Pima Indians.Diabetes Care. 1995; 18: 435-439
- Associations of hip and thigh circumferences independent of waist circumference with the incidence of type 2 diabetes: the Hoorn Study.Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2003; 77: 1192-1197
- Simple anthropometric indices associated with ischemic heart disease.J. Clin. Epidemiol. 1996; 49: 1017-1024
- Waist-to-thigh ratio can also be a better indicator associated with type 2 diabetes than traditional anthropometrical measurements in Taiwan population.Ann. Epidemiol. 2006; 16: 321-331
- Association between plasma monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 concentration and cardiovascular disease mortality in middle-aged diabetic and nondiabetic individuals.Diabetes Care. 2009; 32: 2105-2110
- Do measures of body fat distribution provide information on the risk of type 2 diabetes in addition to measures of general obesity? Comparison of anthropometric predictors of type 2 diabetes in Pima Indians.Diabetes Care. 2003; 26: 2556-2561
- BMI compared with central obesity indicators in relation to diabetes and hypertension in Asians.Obesity (Silver Spring). 2008; 16: 1622-1635
- Plan and operation of the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988–94. Series I. Programs and Collection Procedures.National Center for Health Statistics, 1994
- The Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III 1988–94) reference manuals and reports [CD-ROM].National Center for Health Statistics, Bethesda, MD1996
- Using a bony landmark to measure waist circumference.J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 1995; 95: 12
- The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.Radiology. 1982; 143: 29-36
- Applied Logistic Regression.2nd ed. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York1989
- Statistical Methods in Diagnostic Medicine.Wiley-Interscience, New York2002
- Index for rating diagnostic tests.Cancer. 1950; 3: 32-35
- Optimal cut-point and its corresponding Youden Index to discriminate individuals using pooled blood samples.Epidemiology. 2005; 16: 73-81
- Use of the ROC curve and the bootstrap in comparing weighted logistic regression models.in: Proceedings of Twenty-Seventh Annual SAS Users Group International Conference, 1–6, Cary, NC, SAS Institute, Inc. Ref Type: Conference Proceeding2002
- Variance estimation for complex surveys using replication techniques.Stat. Methods Med. Res. 1996; 5: 283-310
- Is the reduction of lower-body subcutaneous adipose tissue associated with elevations in risk factors for diabetes and cardiovascular disease?.Diabetologia. 2008; 51: 1475-1482
- Larger thigh and hip circumferences are associated with better glucose tolerance: the Hoorn study.Obes. Res. 2003; 11: 104-111
- Adipose tissue fatty acid metabolism and cardiovascular disease.Curr. Opin. Lipidol. 2005; 16: 409-415
- Definition, Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes Mellitus and its Complications: Report of a WHO Consultation. Part 1. Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes Mellitus.World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland1999
- Comparison of body mass index, waist circumference, and waist/hip ratio in predicting incident diabetes: a meta-analysis.Epidemiol. Rev. 2007; 29: 115-128
- Fat distribution in European women: a comparison of anthropometric measurements in relation to cardiovascular risk factors.Int. J. Epidemiol. 1990; 19: 303-308
- Fat distribution in European men: a comparison of anthropometric measurements in relation to cardiovascular risk factors.Int. J. Obes. Relat. Metab. Disord. 1992; 16: 17-22
- Diagnostic performance of body mass index to detect obesity in patients with coronary artery disease.Eur. Heart J. 2007; 28: 2087-2093
- Sex differences in the relationships between BMI, WHR and incidence of cardiovascular disease: a population-based cohort study.Int. J. Obes. (Lond.). 2006; 30: 1775-1781
- Gender differences in the association between anthropometric indices of obesity and blood pressure in Japanese.Hypertens. Res. 2006; 29: 75-80
- Sex differences in the relation of body composition to markers of inflammation.Atherosclerosis. 2006; 184: 216-224
- Racial differences in insulin resistance and mid-thigh fat deposition in postmenopausal women.Obes. Res. 2002; 10: 336-344
- Attenuation of skeletal muscle and strength in the elderly: the Health ABC Study.J. Appl. Physiol. 2001; 90: 2157-2165
- Age-related changes in fat deposition in mid-thigh muscle in women: relationships with metabolic cardiovascular disease risk factors.Int. J. Obes. Relat. Metab. Disord. 1999; 23: 126-132
- Subcutaneous abdominal fat and thigh muscle composition predict insulin sensitivity independently of visceral fat.Diabetes. 1997; 46: 1579-1585
- Altered body composition in type 2 diabetes mellitus.Int. J. Obes. (Lond.). 2008; 32: 780-787
- Agreement between self-report questionnaires and medical record data was substantial for diabetes, hypertension, myocardial infarction and stroke but not for heart failure.J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2004; 57: 1096-1103
- Prevalence of diabetes, impaired fasting glucose, and impaired glucose tolerance in U.S. adults. The Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988–1994.Diabetes Care. 1998; 21: 518-524
Article info
Publication history
Published online: March 15, 2010
Accepted:
February 18,
2010
Received in revised form:
February 17,
2010
Received:
August 24,
2009
Footnotes
☆The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Identification
Copyright
Published by Elsevier Inc.
