Assessment of obesity in children and adolescents: synthesis of recent systematic reviews and clinical guidelines

Assessment of obesity in children and adolescents: synthesis of recent systematic reviews and... This review summarises recent systematic reviews and evidence‐based guidelines that deal with the issue of how best to diagnose or define obesity in children and adolescents. A recent systematic review showed that parents typically fail to recognise obesity in their children and adolescents, and a good deal of other evidence suggests that health professionals under‐diagnose obesity in children and adolescents when using informal methods based on observation. There is therefore a need for practical, objective, methods that both identify the fattest children and adolescents adequately, and identify those who are at greatest risk of the ‘co‐morbidities’ of obesity. A large body of consistent evidence shows that a high body mass index (BMI) for age and sex identifies the fattest children adequately, with low–moderate false negative rate and a low false positive rate. Furthermore, children and adolescents at high BMI for age are at much greater risk of the co‐morbidities of obesity. A recent systematic review found that the use of BMI for age with national reference data and cut‐off points (such as the 95th percentile to define obesity) was superior to the Cole–International Obesity Task Force international approach for defining obesity based on BMI for age. The same systematic review also found no evidence that use of waist circumference for age improved the diagnosis of obesity, or the cardio‐metabolic co‐morbidities of obesity, in children and adolescents. Recent systematic reviews are therefore supportive of current guidelines that recommend percentile‐based cut‐offs relative to national reference data to (e.g. BMI at or above the 95th or 98th percentile in the UK) to define obesity for clinical applications in children and adolescents. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Human Nutrition & Dietetics Wiley

Assessment of obesity in children and adolescents: synthesis of recent systematic reviews and clinical guidelines

Journal of Human Nutrition & Dietetics, Volume 23 (3) – Jun 1, 2010

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/assessment-of-obesity-in-children-and-adolescents-synthesis-of-recent-RTq5wq6hPC
Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
© 2010 The Author. Journal compilation © 2010 The British Dietetic Association Ltd
ISSN
0952-3871
eISSN
1365-277X
D.O.I.
10.1111/j.1365-277X.2010.01054.x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This review summarises recent systematic reviews and evidence‐based guidelines that deal with the issue of how best to diagnose or define obesity in children and adolescents. A recent systematic review showed that parents typically fail to recognise obesity in their children and adolescents, and a good deal of other evidence suggests that health professionals under‐diagnose obesity in children and adolescents when using informal methods based on observation. There is therefore a need for practical, objective, methods that both identify the fattest children and adolescents adequately, and identify those who are at greatest risk of the ‘co‐morbidities’ of obesity. A large body of consistent evidence shows that a high body mass index (BMI) for age and sex identifies the fattest children adequately, with low–moderate false negative rate and a low false positive rate. Furthermore, children and adolescents at high BMI for age are at much greater risk of the co‐morbidities of obesity. A recent systematic review found that the use of BMI for age with national reference data and cut‐off points (such as the 95th percentile to define obesity) was superior to the Cole–International Obesity Task Force international approach for defining obesity based on BMI for age. The same systematic review also found no evidence that use of waist circumference for age improved the diagnosis of obesity, or the cardio‐metabolic co‐morbidities of obesity, in children and adolescents. Recent systematic reviews are therefore supportive of current guidelines that recommend percentile‐based cut‐offs relative to national reference data to (e.g. BMI at or above the 95th or 98th percentile in the UK) to define obesity for clinical applications in children and adolescents.

Journal

Journal of Human Nutrition & DieteticsWiley

Published: Jun 1, 2010

References

  • Accuracy of simple clinical and epidemiological definitions of childhood obesity: systematic review and evidence appraisal
    Reilly, Reilly; Kelly, Kelly; Wilson, Wilson
  • Tracking of childhood overweight into adulthood: a systematic review of the literature
    Singh, Singh; Mulder, Mulder; Twisk, Twisk; Van Mechelen, Van Mechelen; Chinapaw, Chinapaw

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off