Comparing apples and pears: women's perceptions of their body size and shape.

BackgroundObesity is a growing public health problem among reproductive-aged women, with consequences for chronic disease risk and reproductive and obstetric morbidities. Evidence also suggests that body shape (i.e., regional fat distribution) may be independently associated with risk, yet it is not known if women adequately perceive their shape. This study aimed to assess the validity of self-reported body size and shape figure drawings when compared to anthropometric measures among reproductive-aged women.MethodsSelf-reported body size was ascertained using the Stunkard nine-level figures and self-reported body shape using stylized pear, hourglass, rectangle, and apple figures. Anthropometry was performed by trained researchers. Body size and body mass index (BMI) were compared using Spearman's correlation coefficient. Fat distribution indicators were compared across body shapes for nonobese and obese women using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Fisher's exact test. Percent agreement and kappa statistics were computed for apple and pear body shapes.ResultsThe 131 women studied were primarily Caucasian (81%), aged 32 years, with a mean BMI of 27.1 kg/m(2) (range 16.6-52.8 kg/m(2)). The correlation between body size and BMI was 0.85 (p<0.001). Among nonobese women, waist-to-hip ratios (WHR) were 0.75, 0.75, 0.80, and 0.82 for pear, hourglass, rectangle, and apple, respectively (p<0.001). Comparing apples and pears, the percent agreement (kappa) for WHR≥0.80 was 83% (0.55).ConclusionsSelf-reported size and shape were consistent with anthropometric measures commonly used to assess obesity and fat distribution, respectively. Self-reported body shape may be a useful proxy measure in addition to body size in large-scale surveys.