We only have this paper's title and publication details.
Read it at the sourceCaptured external expert commentary on this paper, strongest first. Original sources are linked where available.
“A critical point is being missed here, which relates to the translation of measures from large population studies to the management of the individual. In large population studies performed in adults, BMI provides a useful surrogate index of obesity because it corrects for individuals who are heavy by virtue of the fact that they are also tall. In large population studies, a higher BMI might reasonably be assumed due to excess fat mass. Of course it is accepted that BMI provides no information regarding the composition of the weight, or its distribution, but this does not matter so much when the study is performed in 49,000 subjects. However, populations are comprised of individuals, and it is individuals we treat. In adults, body height does not change over time, so BMI reverts to a measure of gross body weight in the individual. Is it valid to simply measure body weight as an index of fatness when following up patients?”
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sheldon E. Litwin (2008) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: