Background: Accurate anthropometric measurements are fundamental in clinical practice, sports science, and epidemiological research, yet their reliability can be influenced by methodological and sociocultural factors. This study investigated the reliability of anthropometric measurements with emphasis on gender‑related influences in intra‑ and inter‑rater reproducibility among ninety‑six undergraduate students aged 18–30 years at Ebonyi State University, Abakaliki. Methods: Standardized instruments were used to assess height, weight, head girth, neck girth, arm girth (relaxed and flexed), forearm girth, waist circumference, and gluteal girth, following ISAK protocols. Two trained raters, one male and one female, independently measured both male and female participants to evaluate same-gender and cross-gender reproducibility. Reliability was assessed using Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC), Bland–Altman analysis, Cronbach’s Alpha, and correlation coefficients. Results: Results showed excellent reproducibility for height and weight across all groups (ICC > 0.99), while circumference-based parameters such as waist and gluteal girth demonstrated weaker agreement, particularly in cross-gender assessments (male gluteal girth ICC = 0.426; female gluteal girth ICC = 0.291). Same-gender measurements consistently yielded higher reliability, whereas opposite-gender measurements introduced greater variability, especially in culturally sensitive body regions. Conclusion: The study concludes that although measurement errors cannot be completely eliminated, adherence to standardized protocols and incorporation of gender-sensitive approaches can substantially improve accuracy and reproducibility in anthropometric research.
Obasi et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: