RSM logo
JRSM

Home Current issue Browse archive Alerts About the journal Feedback
 
J R Soc Med 2006;99:434
doi:10.1258/jrsm.99.9.434
© 2006 Royal Society of Medicine

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Send a Quick Comment
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Quick Comments are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gori, G. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
J R Soc Med 2006;99:434
© 2006 The Royal Society of Medicine

Letters

Trends in obesity

Gio Batta Gori

The Health Policy Center, 6704 Barr Road, Bethesda, MD 20816, USA

E-mail: gorigb{at}msn.com

Ezzati et al. (May 2006 JRSM1) misplace their confidence by a wide margin in claiming to have reached the first ‘unbiased’ estimates of state and national levels and trends of obesity in the USA. To do so, they claim to have calculated rates of self-reporting biases using data from the NHANES (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey) and Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) surveys of the US Center for Disease Control and Prevention, which were assumed to be representative of the USA population on the basis of the original sampling design. In reality the assumption is questionable, the response rates being about 80% for NHANES and 45% for BRFSS. If nothing else, such a discrepancy sets a distance between what the two surveys may represent, also considering that the surveys represent different samples. In a crucial decision, Ezzati et al. excluded subjects who did not participate in both surveys—an exclusion that inevitably invalidates any claim that the bias estimates reached could be representative of the USA population or of individual state populations. Such elementary flaws lead to ask how scarce resources could be approved for such a wanting study design.

Footnotes

Competing interests None declared.

REFERENCES

  1. Ezzati M, Martin H, Skjold S, Hoorn SV, Murray CJL. Trends in national and state-level obesity in the USA after correction for self report bias: analysis of health surveys. J R Soc Med2006; 99:250 -7[Abstract/Free Full Text]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?



This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Send a Quick Comment
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Quick Comments are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gori, G. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

MRI of the Whole Body

 Developing the Wise Doctor RSM Press eJournals Collection 2010