Altitude and its inverse association with abdominal obesity in an Andean country: a cross-sectional study

Jaime Pajuelo-Ramírez; Harold Torres-Aparcana; Rosa Agüero-Zamora; Antonio M. Quispe

doi:10.12688/f1000research.20707.1

Home Browse Altitude and its inverse association with abdominal obesity in an...

ALL Metrics

-

Views

-

Downloads

Get PDF

Get XML

Export

▬

✚

Research Article

Altitude and its inverse association with abdominal obesity in an Andean country: a cross-sectional study

[version 1; peer review: 2 approved, 1 not approved]

Jaime Pajuelo-Ramírez¹, Harold Torres-Aparcana ^2,3, Rosa Agüero-Zamora⁴, Antonio M. Quispe⁵

PUBLISHED 10 Oct 2019

Author details Author details

¹ Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima, Peru
² Universidad San Martin de Porres, Lima, Peru
³ Clínica San Felipe, Lima, Peru
⁴ Hospital Nacional Dos de Mayo, Lima, Peru
⁵ Universidad Continental, Huancayo, Peru

Jaime Pajuelo-Ramírez
Roles: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Project Administration, Writing – Original Draft Preparation

Harold Torres-Aparcana
Roles: Formal Analysis, Methodology, Supervision, Visualization, Writing – Review & Editing

Rosa Agüero-Zamora
Roles: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing

Antonio M. Quispe
Roles: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Review & Editing

OPEN PEER REVIEW

REVIEWER STATUS

Abstract

Background: Abdominal obesity represents an accurate predictor of overall morbidity and mortality, which is worrisome because it is also continuously increasing across Andean countries. However, its relationship with altitude remains unclear. The objective of this study was to assess the association between altitude and abdominal obesity in Peru, and how sociodemographic variables impact this association.
Methods: We estimated the prevalence of abdominal obesity in Peru and analyzed its association with altitude using the data from the 2012-2013 National Household Survey (ENAHO). During this survey, a representative sample of Peruvians was screened for abdominal obesity, using waist circumference as a proxy, and the Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines cutoffs.
Results: Data were analyzed from a sample of 20,489 Peruvians (51% male). The prevalence of abdominal obesity was estimated at 33.6% (95% CI: 32.5 to 34.6%). In Peru, altitude was significantly and inversely associated with abdominal obesity, decreasing with higher altitudes: 1500-2999 meters above mean sea level (MAMSL) vs <1500 MAMSL, adjusted prevalence rate [aPR]= 0.86 (95% CI: 0.75 to 0.97); ≥3000 MAMSL vs <1500 MAMSL, aPR= 0.98 (95% CI: 0.87 to 1.11), when adjusting by age, gender and residence area (rural/urban). However, this association was significantly modified by age and gender (p< 0.001).
Conclusion: Abdominal obesity is highly prevalent in Peru and decreases significantly with altitude, but age and gender modify this association. Thus, abdominal obesity appears to affect older women from low altitudes more than younger men from high altitudes.

Keywords

Abdominal obesity, Altitude, Obesity, Waist Circumference, Peru

Corresponding author: Harold Torres-Aparcana

Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information: The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work.

Copyright: © 2019 Pajuelo-Ramírez J et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

How to cite: Pajuelo-Ramírez J, Torres-Aparcana H, Agüero-Zamora R and Quispe AM. Altitude and its inverse association with abdominal obesity in an Andean country: a cross-sectional study [version 1; peer review: 2 approved, 1 not approved]. F1000Research 2019, 8:1738 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.20707.1) First published: 10 Oct 2019, 8:1738 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.20707.1) Latest published: 27 Dec 2019, 8:1738 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.20707.2)

Introduction

The increasing prevalence of obesity represents a significant public health problem across low- to high-income countries¹. The main reason is that obesity is strongly associated with morbidity and mortality, mostly due to type 2 diabetes, cancer and cardiovascular diseases². However, body fat distribution, particularly that of abdominal obesity, has been reported as a better predictor of overall morbidity and mortality than total adiposity or obesity defined by body mass index (BMI)^3,4. Furthermore, abdominal obesity is difficult to diagnose in routine clinical care because it requires access to computed tomography⁵ or magnetic resonance imaging⁶ for precise quantification. Thus, the most commonly used surrogate to diagnose abdominal obesity in clinical care and research examinations is waist circumference^7,8. This surrogate has proven to perform well at sea level; however, little is known about its usefulness in high altitudes.

In Peru, as in most Latin-American countries, the prevalence of obesity among children, adolescents and adults have grown consistently in recent decades. Among Peruvian adults, estimates of the national prevalence of obesity have grown from approximately 9% in 1975 to 21% in 2017⁹. However, this prevalence seems to vary substantially by altitude.

Epidemiological studies carried out in the United States¹⁰ and Peru¹¹ among adults and children¹² have described an inverse association between altitude and obesity. A previous study reported that the risk of obesity in Peru decreases by approximately 26% at between 1500–2999 meters above mean sea level (MAMSL), and by 46% at over 3000 MAMSL, as compared to at 0–499 MAMSL¹¹.

Consequently, this study further assesses the association between altitude and abdominal obesity, when adjusted by standard sociodemographic variables. Additionally, we plan to estimate the prevalence of abdominal obesity by different cutoffs.

Methods

Study design

The study employed a cross-sectional multicentric study design. Data were accessed from the Peruvian National Household Survey (ENAHO), undertaken annually by the Peruvian National Institute of Statistics and Information (INEI) and the National Center for Food and Nutrition (CENAN) to assess social living conditions. For this purpose, the INEI and CENAN surveyed a representative sample of the Peruvian population using a probabilistic, stratified, multi-stage design, independent for each region, to collect data on participants of ≥2 months of age¹³. ENAHO survey eligibility criteria were inhabitants of Peruvian households, including family members, non-family members and domestic workers (with or without payment) that cohabitated during the 30 days prior to the survey, excluding households of 10 or more inhabitants¹³. In this study, we used ENAHO 2013 data to assess the prevalence of abdominal obesity and its association with altitude, while adjusting for their primary demographics and design effect.

Variables of interest

The study outcome was abdominal obesity: we used waist circumference (WC) as a proxy for its diagnosis. During the ENAHO survey, trained personnel measured the subject’s WC at the vertical position of the midpoint between the lowest rib and the border of the iliac crest⁸. We interpreted this measurement by using the cutoffs proposed by Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines (ATP III) for abdominal obesity: WC >102 cm for men and >88 cm for women^14,15. Additionally, for comparison, we assessed the cutoffs proposed by the Latin-American Diabetes Association (ALAD): WC ≥94 cm for men and ≥88 cm for women¹⁶ and that of the International Diabetes Federation (IDF): WC >90 cm for men and >80 cm for women¹⁷. Furthermore, we define abdominal obesity as a weight to height ratio (WtHR) ≥0.5¹⁸ and obesity as a BMI ≥30 kg/m².

To facilitate comparisons and interpretability, we categorized altitude as low (<1500 MAMSL), moderate (1500–2999 MAMSL), and high (≥3000 MAMSL). Likewise, individuals were categorized by age as young adults (20–39 years), adults (40–59 years) and elders (≥60 years). We classified the area of residence as urban or rural based on the rural index of each district, which is assessed annually by INEI. Nutritional status was assessed by BMI and categorized using WHO standard cutoffs as underweight (<18.5 kg/m²), normal (18.5–24.9 kg/m²), overweight (25–29.9 kg/m²), and obese (≥30 kg/m²)¹⁹.

Statistical analysis

We estimated the prevalence of abdominal obesity by considering survey sampling weights by using STATA survey (svy) commands and excluding registers with missing study outcomes. We assessed bivariate association using Spearman’s rank-order correlation. Considering that the prevalence of abdominal obesity in Peru is not rare⁹, we estimated the adjusted prevalence ratio as a measure of association instead of the odds ratio²⁰. Thus, we used a log-binomial regression model that has robust variance, rather than a Poisson regression model, to adjust our prevalence ratio estimates by gender, age group and area of residence²¹. Finally, we tested whether sex and age modified the association between abdominal obesity and altitude using the Wald test. All statistical analyses were performed using STATA/MP 14.0 for Mac (StataCorp LP, College Station, TX), and the results of statistical tests were interpreted and summarized with 95% confidence intervals.

Ethical statement

According to the Regulation of Ethics in Research of the Peruvian National Institute of Health, this study did not require approval or exemption from an ethics committee because the database is publicly available.

Results

Characteristics of the study population

We analyzed a population sample of 20,489 subjects from 703 different locations across 25 administrative regions of Peru. To summarize population demographics, most subjects were either female (51.6%), adults between 20 to 39 years of age (39.8%), or inhabitants from urban areas (79.6%)²². Of these three demographic measures, both age groups (p=0.0006) and area of residence (p<0.0001) distribution varied significantly by altitude (Table 1).

Table 1. Peru’s demographics by altitude level.

Characteristics	Number of participants (%)			Total
Characteristics	<1500 MAMSL	1500–2999 MAMSL	≥3000 MAMSL	Total
Age (years)
20 to 39	5092 (40.7)	1262 (40.0)	1649 (36.4)	8003 (39.8)
40 to 59	4804 (37.8)	1226 (36.8)	1795 (38.0)	7825 (37.7)
≥60	2555 (21.5)	818 (23.2)	1288 (25.6)	4661 (22.5)
Gender
Female	6796 (51.4)	1848 (52.0)	2703 (52.4)	11347 (51.6)
Male	5655 (48.6)	1458 (47.6)	2029 (47.6)	9142 (48.4)
Residence area
Urban	9861 (89.4)	1744 (61.7)	2354 (57.3)	13959 (79.6)
Rural	2590 (10.6)	1562 (38.3)	2378 (42.7)	6530 (20.4)
Body Mass Index
Underweight	139 (1.2)	46 (1.4)	93 (1.8)	278 (1.3)
Normal	4257 (33.1)	1614 (46.4)	2560 (52.1)	8430 (38.5)
Overweight	5317 (42.8)	1173 (37.2)	1578 (34.3)	8068 (40.5)
Obesity	2738 (22.9)	473 (15.0)	501 (11.8)	3712 (19.7)
Abdominal obesity
By Waist ATP III	4402 (37.1)	893 (28.7)	1098 (24.3)	6393 (33.6)
By Waist ALAD	5683 (49.4)	1107 (37.0)	1394 (31.9)	8184 (44.4)
By Waist IDF	8330 (69.1)	1804 (57.2)	2342 (51.0)	12476 (64.1)
By WtHR >0.5	10632 (86.1)	2629 (80.8)	3666 (77.9)	16903 (83.9)

Parameters estimated considering the design effect and the complexities of the survey; WtHR, waist-to-height ratio; MAMSL, meters above mean sea level; ATP III, Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines; ALAD, Latin-American Diabetes Association; IDF, International Diabetes Federation.

Prevalence of obesity and abdominal obesity in Peru

The prevalence of abdominal obesity in Peru was 33.6% (95% CI: 32.5% - 34.6%) when using WC and the ATP III cutoff, 44.4% (95% CI: 43.2% - 45.6%) using the ALAD cutoff and 64.1% (95% CI: 63.0% - 65.2%) using the IDF cutoff (Table 1). Regardless of the cutoff used (i.e. ATP III, ALAD, or IDF), the prevalence of abdominal obesity decreased significantly (p<0.001) with altitude: abdominal obesity was more prevalent at low elevations (<1500 MAMSL), less prevalent at moderate elevations (1500–2999 MAMSL), and lowest at high elevations (≥3000 MAMSL) (Table 1 and Figure 1).

Figure 1. Prevalence of abdominal obesity by altitude and by different cutoffs.

ATP III, Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines; ALAD, Latin-American Diabetes Association; IDF, International Diabetes Federation; MAMSL, meters above mean sea level.

Similarly, we estimated the prevalence of abdominal obesity in Peru using waist to height ratio (WtHR) to be 83.9% (95% CI: 83.1%-84.6%). Like the previous model that employed WC as a surrogate measure of abdominal obesity, the present model also demonstrated an inverse association between abdominal obesity and altitude category. In this model, the prevalence of abdominal obesity (as defined by WtHR) was 86.1% (95% CI: 85.1%-87.1%) for those at low altitudes, 80.7% (95% CI: 78.9%-82.7%) at moderate altitudes, and 77.9% (95% CI: 76.1% to 79.6%) at high altitudes (p<0.001) (Table 1).

We estimated the total prevalence of obesity in Peru by BMI to be 19.7% (95% CI: 18.9%-20.6%). Like that of abdominal obesity, the prevalence of obesity was inversely related to the categories of altitude that we defined. Obesity prevalence was 22.9% (95% CI: 21.7%-24.1%) at low elevations, 15.0% (95% CI: 13.5%-16.6%) at moderate elevations, and 11.8% (95% CI: 10.6%-13.1%) at high elevations for those living at or over 3000 MAMSL, respectively (p<0.001) (Table 1).

Variability of abdominal obesity by different cutoffs in Peru

Estimates of abdominal obesity prevalence vary significantly with altitude and in models that use different standard diagnostic cutoffs. When comparing the estimated prevalence of abdominal obesity using ATP III, ALAD and IDF cutoffs (Table 1 and Figure 1), there were significant differences between them (p<0.001 at each paired comparison). The same variability was observed regardless of age group, gender, and residence area (Table 2). Furthermore, in the correlation analysis (Table 3), we found that using the ATP III cutoff resulted in a stronger correlation with obesity (Spearman´s ρ = 0.55; p<0.001), as compared with the ALAD (Spearman´s ρ = 0.53; p<0.001) and IDF cutoffs (Spearman´s ρ = 0.37; p<0.001). However, the ATP III cutoff also has a weaker correlation with altitude (Spearman´s ρ = 0.12; p<0.001). Additionally, we found that the prevalence of abdominal obesity, as defined by WtHR >0.5, has only a moderate correlation with the prevalence of obesity (Spearman´s ρ = 0.43; p<0.001) and a weak correlation with altitude (Table 3).

Table 2. Abdominal obesity prevalence by demographic and nutritional factors at different altitude levels.

	ATP III				ALAD				IDF
	<1500 MAMSL % (95% CI)	1500– 2999 MAMSL % (95% CI)	≥3000 MAMSL % (95% CI)	Total % (95% CI)	< 1500 MAMSL % (95% CI)	1500– 2999 MAMSL % (95% CI)	≥3000 MAMSL % (95% CI)	Total % (95% CI)	<1500 MAMSL % (95% CI)	1500– 2999 MAMSL % (95% CI)	≥3000 MAMSL % (95% CI)	Total % (95% CI)
	All	37	29	24	34	49	37	32	44	69	57	51	64
	(36-38)	(27-30)	(22-26)	(33-35)	(48-51)	(35-40)	(30-34)	(43-46)	(68-71)	(55-60)	(49-53)	(63-65)
Age groups
20 to 39 years	25	19	20	24	35	25	24	32	56	46	45	53
	(24-27)	(16-22)	(17-22)	(22-25)	(33-37)	(22-28)	(22-27)	(30-33)	(54-58)	(42-49)	(42-48)	(51-54)
40 to 59 years	44	38	31	41	58	48	40	54	78	68	58	73
	(42-47)	(34-41)	(27-34)	(39-42)	(56-61)	(44-52)	(37-44)	(52-55)	(76-80)	(64-71)	(54-62)	(71-74)
≥60 years	47	31	22	39	61	41	30	52	79	60	49	70
	(44-50)	(27-36)	(19-25)	(37-41)	(59-64)	(35-46)	(27-34)	(50-54)	(77-81)	(55-64)	(45-52)	(68-71)
Gender
Female	56	44	40	51	56	44	40	51	80	71	66	76
	(54-58)	(41-47)	(38-43)	(50-53)	(54-58)	(41-47)	(38-43)	(50-52)	(79-82)	(69-74)	(63-68)	(75-77)
Male	18	12	7	15	43	29	23	37	57	42	36	51
	(16-19)	(10-15)	(5-8)	(14-16)	(40-45)	(26-32)	(26-38)	(35-39)	(55-59)	(38-45)	(31-38)	(49-53)
Residence area
Urban	39	35	31	37	51	45	42	49	71	66	61	69
	(37-40)	(32-37)	(29-34)	(36-39)	(50-53)	(43-48)	(39-45)	(48-51)	(70-72)	(63-68)	(58-64)	(68-70)
Rural	23	19	15	18	32	23	19	25	53	43	37	44
	(20-25)	(16-22)	(13-17)	(17-20)	(29-36)	(21-26)	(16-21)	(23-27)	(40-56)	(40-47)	(34-41)	(42-47)

Estimates considering the design effect and the complexities of the survey; abdominal obesity estimated using the cutoffs proposed by Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines (ATP III); MAMSL, meters above mean sea level; ALAD, Latin-American Diabetes Association; IDF, International Diabetes Federation.

Table 3. Correlation between altitude and each of our parameters of interest.

	Altitude	BMI	Waist	WtHR	AO-ATP III	AO-ALAD	AO-IDF	AO-WtHR >0.5
BMI	-0.1872
Waist	-0.2049	0.8406
WtHR	-0.1437	0.8375	0.8997
AO-ATP III	-0.1241	0.6396	0.6573	0.7264
AO-ALAD	-0.1559	0.6823	0.7680	0.7539	0.8258
AO-IDF	-0.1608	0.6175	0.6861	0.7067	0.5397	0.6536
AO-WtHR >0.5	-0.1218	0.6349	0.7462	0.7552	0.5613	0.7007	0.6132
Obesity	-0.1350	0.7438	0.6137	0.6271	0.5546	0.5330	0.3679	0.4340

All the correlations estimated in the table resulted in a p-value <0.001 when tested as equal to zero. BMI, body mass index; AO, abdominal obesity; WtHR, waist to height ratio; ATP III, Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines; ALAD, Latin-American Diabetes Association; IDF, International Diabetes Federation.

Variability of abdominal obesity by altitude in Peru

The prevalence of abdominal obesity and obesity vary significantly by altitude in Peru and are inversely associated with altitude category (trend analysis p<0.001 for both), regardless of age group, gender and residence area (Table 4). Both abdominal obesity and obesity prevalence were significantly higher among females than males (p<0.001 for both) and across rural areas than in urban areas (p<0.001 for both). The prevalence of obesity and abdominal obesity were significantly lower among young adults (20–39 years) than among adults (40–59 years); however, both obesity and abdominal obesity prevalence were significantly higher in young adults than elders (≥60 years old).

Table 4. Obesity and abdominal obesity prevalence by demographic at different altitudes.

Characteristics	Abdominal obesity *⁺				Obesity by BMI*
	Prevalence (95% CI)				Prevalence (95% CI)
	<1500 MAMSL	1500–2999 MAMSL	≥3000 MAMSL	Total	<1500 MAMSL	1500–2999 MAMSL	≥3000 MAMSL	Total
All	37	29	24	36	23	15	12	20
	(36-39)	(26-31)	(22-26)	(33-35)	(21-24)	(14-17)	(11-13)	(19-21)
Age groups
20 to 39 years	25	19	20	24	18	10	8	15
	(24-27)	(16-22)	(17-22)	(22-25)	(16-19)	(9-12)	(6-10)	(14-16)
40 to 59 years	44	38	30	41	27	20	17	24
	(42-47)	(34-41)	(27-34)	(39-42)	(25-29)	(18-23)	(14-19)	(23-26)
≥60 years	47	31	22	39	25	15	10	20
	(44-50)	(27-36)	(19-25)	(37-41)	(22-27)	(12-19)	(8-12)	(19-22)
Gender
Female	56	44	40	51	26	20	18	23
	(54-58)	(41-47)	(38-43)	(50-53)	(24-28)	(18-22)	(16-20)	(22-25)
Male	18	12	7	15	20	10	5	16
	(16-19)	(10-15)	(5-8)	(14-16)	(18-22)	(8-12)	(4-7)	(14-17)
Residence area
Urban	39	35	31	37	24	20	16	22
	(37-40)	(32-37)	(29-34)	(36-39)	(23-25)	(17-21)	(15-17)	(21-23)
Rural	23	19	15	18	13	8	6	9
	(20-25)	(16-22)	(13-17)	(17-20)	(11-15)	(7-10)	(5-7)	(8-10)

*Estimates considering the design effect and the complexities of the survey; +, abdominal obesity estimated using the cutoffs proposed by Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines (ATP III); MAMSL, meters above mean sea level; BMI, body mass index; 95% CI, confidence intervals of 95%.

Abdominal obesity and its association with altitude in Peru

Regression analyses demonstrated that the prevalence of abdominal obesity was significantly associated with altitude when either unadjusted and adjusted by age groups, gender, and residence. Additionally, we observed significant effect modification of this association by age group and gender, which seems to be particularly high at altitudes over 3000 MAMSL. Once adjusted by the interaction terms, the association between abdominal obesity and altitude varies significantly by gender, age group and residence area, with different patterns of distribution at different altitudes. At lower altitudes (<1500 MAMSL), the prevalence of abdominal obesity exhibits a positive trend increasing by age group, while above 1500 MAMSL, it exhibits an inverted-u shaped relationship (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Prevalence of abdominal obesity (by Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines cutoffs) by age group and altitude.

The association between abdominal obesity and altitude vary greatly by gender and age group, which behave as effect modifiers.

Abdominal obesity and its associated factors in Peru

In the regression analysis, we found that altitude, age groups, gender, and residential area were significantly associated with the prevalence of abdominal obesity in Peru (Table 5). Based on our multivariate regression analysis outputs, we observed that the prevalence of abdominal obesity decreased with altitude, increased with age, and is lower among male and rural populations. However, contrary to what was observed for the prevalence of abdominal obesity by altitude in the case of gender and residence area, both of which decrease with altitude, the variability of the prevalence of abdominal obesity by age group exhibits different patterns of distribution at different altitudes. Overall, the prevalence of abdominal obesity in Peru is higher among women ≥60 years living at <1500 MAMSL (68.4%; 95% CI, 64.6 to 71.9), and lower among men between 20 to 39 years of age living al ≥3000 MAMSL (2.8%; 95% CI, 1.6 to 4.8), exhibiting an inverted-u shaped relationship (Figure 2).

Table 5. Factors associated with abdominal obesity (by ATP III) in Peru.

Factors	Unadjusted PR*	95% CI	Adjusted PR*	95% CI
Altitude (MAMSL)
<1500	Ref.		Ref.
1500 to 2999	0.77	0.71 to 0.84^‡	0.86	0.75 to 0.97^†
≥ 3000	0.65	0.60 to 0.71‡	0.98	0.87 to 1.11^°
Age group (years)
20–39	Ref.		Ref.
40–59	1.73	1.62 to 1.85‡	1.66	1.54 to 1.79‡
≥60	1.66	1.55 to 1.79‡	1.77	1.64 to 1.91‡
Gender
Female	Ref.		Ref.
Male	0.29	0.26 to 0.32‡	0.33	0.30 to 0.36‡
Residence area
Urban	Ref.		Ref.
Rural	0.49	0.45 to 0.53‡	0.58	0.53 to 0.63‡
Altitude x gender
1500 to 2999 x Male			0.85	0.67 to 1.08^°
≥3000 x Male			0.5	0.38 to 0.66‡
Altitude x age group
1500 to 2999 x 40-59			1.17	1.01 to 1.36^†
(1500 to 2999 x ≥60) or (≥3000 x 40 to 59)			0.95	0.83 to 1.08^°
≥3000 x ≥60			0.63	0.53 to 0.75‡

Design effect was considered according to complex survey data; ATP III, Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines; PR, prevalence rates; CI 95%, confidence intervals of 95%, MAMSL: meters above mean sea level; °, non-significant p-value; ^†, p-value <0.05; ^‡, p-value <0.001.

Discussion

The prevalence of abdominal obesity in Peru is high and decreases with altitude, an association that is modified by age and gender. This prevalence was higher among women over 60 years of age below 1500 MAMSL, and lowermost among men 20 to 39 years of age over 3000 MAMSL, exhibiting an inverted-u shaped relationship. Understanding the intricacies of this association is critical in countries with high elevation such as Peru, where approximately 20% of the Peruvian population lives at or above 3000 MAMSL²³.

The usefulness of WC as an indicator of abdominal obesity is quite clear; however, there is a permanent discussion regarding the cutoffs for its diagnosis. WC varies by ethnic groups, which has generated the recommendation that each country or region produces its cutoffs²⁴. Worldwide, the most used cutoffs for WC are the ones proposed by the ATP III, which are primarily specific for adult European Caucasian populations^14,15.

There are some efforts in Latin America to propose WC cutoffs for their population. A recent study carried out in five Latin American countries recommended using cutoffs of 90–92 cm for women and 94 cm for men²⁵. In Peru, the PREVENTION study proposed WC cutoffs at high altitude (^~2600 MAMSL) of 87 cm for women and 97 cm for men based on abnormalities of intima-media thickness and cardiovascular manifestations²⁶. Similarly, different countries have proposed their cutoffs for WC, including Portugal (91 and 97 cm)²⁷, China (80 and 84 cm)²⁸, and South Asian countries (84 and 88 cm)²⁹. In our study, different cutoffs produced a wide range of estimates for the prevalence of abdominal obesity. We observed that when using ATP III cutoffs, the estimated prevalence of abdominal obesity was over three times higher among women than in men (51% vs 15%).

Furthermore, regardless of altitude, these differences seem to be even larger ≥3000 MAMSL (40% vs 7%). These differences are similar to those reported previously³⁰, so we believe they can be explained by both the altitude effect and the cutoffs itself, which are gender-differentiated. Further studies are needed to assess the necessity of specific cutoffs corrected by altitude, gender, and age.

Another important finding of our study is that the prevalence of abdominal obesity varies significantly between urban and rural areas, a difference that remains consistent at different altitudes. As reported elsewhere, the prevalence of abdominal obesity in Peru is higher in urban areas than in rural areas³¹. However, such a difference between urban and rural areas seems to increase with higher altitudes, ranging from 1.7:1 at <1500 MAMSL to 2.1:1 at ≥3000 MAMSL. This finding is relevant in countries with large populations living over 3000 MAMSL, due to the cardiovascular risk that this could imply.

Regardless of WC cutoffs utilized, the mean WC in the Peruvian population living at high altitudes is high. In our study, at >3000 MAMSL the mean WC among men was 87.1 cm and among women 86.0 cm, which are lower than those reported at ^~3600 MAMSL in La Paz-Bolivia (93 cm in women and 93 cm in men)³² and close to those reported at ^~3660 MAMSL in Tibet (84.5 cm overall)³³.

According to our results, by both WC and WtHR, Peruvians who live at higher altitudes have a lower prevalence of abdominal obesity than those living a lower altitude. This finding concurs with previous reports^11,34; moreover, a higher percentage of overweight (36.3% vs 25.3%), obesity (17.5% vs 8.5%), hypercholesterolemia (18.9% vs 14.6%), low HDL (45.7% vs 40.3%), hypertension (9.8% vs 3.9%) and glycemia >126 mg/dL (2.9% vs 0.9%) were observed in people living above 3000 MAMSL vs below 1000 MAMSL³⁴. Overall, the lower cardiovascular risk observed at higher altitudes could be explained in part by the lower levels of urbanization and income, commonly reported in developing countries³⁵. Also, it might be explained by the variability in the progress of the epidemiological transition in Peru observed at different altitudes³⁶. It is important to highlight that a WtHR >0.5 seems to overestimate Peruvian abdominal obesity. Regardless of the evidence¹⁸, if we use a cutoff of 0.5, over 80% of the Peruvian population is classified as having abdominal obesity. Further studies are needed to assess the usefulness of such an indicator in Latin-American countries such as Peru.

We should mention as a limitation that the ENAHO survey was meant to represent Peru’s nutritional status, and the sample might not represent all altitudes of the country. Likewise, it is essential to emphasize that Peru is one of the few countries with many large populations over 3000 MAMSL. Therefore, the association between altitude and obesity could remain unnoticed at low altitude countries. Another limitation is the absence of variables such as socioeconomic status, education level, physical activity and diet. However, the area of residence (urban and rural) is a variable that encompasses socioeconomic and educational aspects in our country.

In conclusion, our study found that abdominal obesity is highly prevalent in Peru and that abdominal obesity varies substantially by altitude, age, gender, and urbanization. Overall, the prevalence of abdominal obesity decreases with altitude, but age and gender modify such association; abdominal obesity seems to affect older women from low altitudes more than younger men from high altitudes. These findings should help to guide interventions to reduce Peruvian’s cardiovascular risk, which should be a matter of more significant concern in future years.

Data availability

Underlying data

Figshare: Altitude and its inverse association with abdominal obesity in an Andean country. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.9920234.v1²²

This project contains the following underlying data:

- altitude_abdominal_obesity_dataset.xls (demographic and abdominal obesity data for participants)

Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC-BY 4.0).

Faculty Opinions recommended

References

1. GBD 2015 Obesity Collaborators, Afshin A, Forouzanfar MH, et al.: Health Effects of Overweight and Obesity in 195 Countries over 25 Years. N Engl J Med. 2017; 377(1): 13–27. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
2. Guh DP, Zhang W, Bansback N, et al.: The incidence of co-morbidities related to obesity and overweight: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Public Health. 2009; 9: 88. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
3. Yusuf S, Hawken S, Ounpuu S, et al.: Effect of potentially modifiable risk factors associated with myocardial infarction in 52 countries (the INTERHEART study): case-control study. Lancet. 2004; 364(9438): 937–952. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
4. Hoefle G, Saely CH, Aczel S, et al.: Impact of total and central obesity on vascular mortality in patients undergoing coronary angiography. Int J Obes (Lond). 2005; 29(7): 785–791. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
5. Seidell JC, Björntorp P, Sjöström L, et al.: Regional distribution of muscle and fat mass in men--new insight into the risk of abdominal obesity using computed tomography. Int J Obes. 1989; 13(3): 289–303. PubMed Abstract
6. Ross R, Shaw KD, Martel Y, et al.: Adipose tissue distribution measured by magnetic resonance imaging in obese women. Am J Clin Nutr. 1993; 57(4): 470–475. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
7. de Koning L, Merchant AT, Pogue J, et al.: Waist circumference and waist-to-hip ratio as predictors of cardiovascular events: meta-regression analysis of prospective studies. Eur Heart J. 2007; 28(7): 850–856. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
8. World Health Organization: Waist Circumference and Waist-Hip Ratio: Report of a WHO Expert Consultation, Geneva, 8-11 December 2008. World Health Organization; 2011. Reference Source
9. Pajuelo Ramírez J, Ramírez JP: La obesidad en el Perú. Anales de la Facultad de Medicina. 2017; 78(2): 73. Publisher Full Text
10. Voss JD, Masuoka P, Webber BJ, et al.: Association of elevation, urbanization and ambient temperature with obesity prevalence in the United States. Int J Obes (Lond). 2013; 37(10): 1407–12. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
11. Woolcott OO, Gutierrez C, Castillo OA, et al.: Inverse association between altitude and obesity: A prevalence study among andean and low-altitude adult individuals of Peru. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2016; 24(4): 929–37. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
12. Pajuelo Ramírez J, Miranda Cuadros M, Bernui Leo I: Asociación entre altitud de residencia y malnutrición en niños peruanos menores de cinco años [Association between altitude of residence and malnutrition in Peruvian children under five years of age]. Acta Med Peru. 2017; 34(4): 259–265. Reference Source
13. Instituto Nacional de Estadística e Informática (INEI): Peru - Encuesta Nacional de Hogares Sobre Condiciones de Vida y Pobreza 2017. [National Institute of Statistics and Informatics (INEI). Peru - National Household Survey on Living Conditions and Poverty 2017.] Reference Source
14. Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults: Executive Summary of The Third Report of The National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, And Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol In Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III). JAMA. 2001; 285(19): 2486–2497. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
15. Han TS, van Leer EM, Seidell JC, et al.: Waist circumference action levels in the identification of cardiovascular risk factors: prevalence study in a random sample. BMJ. 1995; 311(7017): 1401–5. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
16. Asociación Latinoamericana de Diabetes (ALAD): Epidemiología, Diagnóstico, Control, Prevención y Tratamiento del Síndrome Metabólico en Adultos. [Latin American Diabetes Association (ALAD). Epidemiology, Diagnosis, Control, Prevention and Treatment of Metabolic Syndrome in Adults]. Rev Asoc Latinoam Diab. 2010; 18(1): 25–44. Reference Source
17. Alberti KG, Zimmet P, Shaw J: Metabolic syndrome--a new world-wide definition. A Consensus Statement from the International Diabetes Federation. Diabet Med. 2006; 23(5): 469–480. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
18. Browning LM, Hsieh SD, Ashwell M: A systematic review of waist-to-height ratio as a screening tool for the prediction of cardiovascular disease and diabetes: 0·5 could be a suitable global boundary value. Nutr Res Rev. 2010; 23(2): 247–269. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
19. World Health Organization: Obesity: preventing and managing the global epidemic. Report of a WHO consultation. 2000. Reference Source
20. Tajeu GS, Sen B, Allison DB, et al.: Misuse of odds ratios in obesity literature: an empirical analysis of published studies. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2012; 20(8): 1726–1731. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
21. Espelt A, Marí-Dell'Olmo M, Penelo E, et al.: Applied Prevalence Ratio estimation with different Regression models: An example from a cross-national study on substance use research. Adicciones. 2017; 29(2): 105–112. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
22. Pajuelo-Ramírez J, Torres-Aparcana H, Agüero-Zamora R, et al.: Altitude and its inverse association with abdominal obesity in an Andean country: Dataset. 2019. http://www.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.9920234
23. Instituto Nacional de Estadística e Informática: Peru - Resultados definitivos de los Censos Nacionales 2017: XII de Población, VII de Vivienda y III de Comunidades Indígenas. [National Institute of Statistics and Informatics. Peru - Final Results of the 2017 National Censuses: XII Population, VII Housing and III Indigenous Communities]. 2018. Reference Source
24. Misra A, Wasir JS, Vikram NK: Waist circumference criteria for the diagnosis of abdominal obesity are not applicable uniformly to all populations and ethnic groups. Nutrition. 2005; 21(9): 969–976. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
25. Aschner P, Buendía R, Brajkovich I, et al.: Determination of the cutoff point for waist circumference that establishes the presence of abdominal obesity in Latin American men and women. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2011; 93(2): 243–247. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
26. Medina-Lezama J, Pastorius CA, Zea-Diaz H, et al.: Optimal definitions for abdominal obesity and the metabolic syndrome in Andean Hispanics: the PREVENCION study. Diabetes Care. 2010; 33(6): 1385–1388. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
27. Raposo L, Severo M, Santos AC: Adiposity cut-off points for cardiovascular disease and diabetes risk in the Portuguese population: The PORMETS study.Tauler P, ed. PLoS One. 2018; 13(1): e0191641. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
28. Wang H, Liu A, Zhao T, et al.: Comparison of anthropometric indices for predicting the risk of metabolic syndrome and its components in Chinese adults: a prospective, longitudinal study. BMJ Open. 2017; 7(9): e016062. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
29. Patel SA, Deepa M, Shivashankar R, et al.: Comparison of multiple obesity indices for cardiovascular disease risk classification in South Asian adults: The CARRS Study. Kiechl S, ed. PLoS One. 2017; 12(4): e0174251. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
30. Pajuelo J, Sánchez-Abanto J, Torres HL, et al.: Prevalencia del síndrome metabólico en pobladores peruanos por debajo de 1 000 y por encima de los 3 000 msnm [Prevalence of the metabolic syndrome in Peruvian settlers below 1,000 and above 3,000 meters above sea level]. Anales de la Facultad de Medicina. 2012; 73(2): 101–106. Publisher Full Text
31. Carrillo-Larco RM, Bernabé-Ortiz A, Pillay TD, et al.: Obesity risk in rural, urban and rural-to-urban migrants: prospective results of the PERU MIGRANT study. Int J Obes (Lond). 2016; 40(1): 181–185. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
32. Paye-Huanca EO, Navia-Bueno M de P: Prevalencia y factores de riesgo asociados para sobrepeso y obesidad en la población adulta de la ciudad de La Paz [Prevalence and associated risk factors for overweight and obesity in the adult population of the city of La Paz]- Gestión 2014. Cuad Hosp Clin. 2018; 59: 31–40. Reference Source
33. Sherpa LY, Deji, Stigum H, et al.: Obesity in Tibetans aged 30-70 living at different altitudes under the north and south faces of Mt. Everest. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2010; 7(4): 1670–1680. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
34. Pajuelo-Ramírez J, Sánchez-Abanto J, Arbañil-Huamán H: Las enfermedades crónicas no transmisibles en el Perú y su relación con la altitud [Chronic noncommunicable diseases in Peru and their relationship with altitude]. Rev Soc Peru Med Interna. 2010; 23(2): 45–52. Reference Source
35. Sliwa K, Acquah L, Gersh BJ, et al.: Impact of Socioeconomic Status, Ethnicity, and Urbanization on Risk Factor Profiles of Cardiovascular Disease in Africa. Circulation. 2016; 133(12): 1199–1208. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
36. Huicho L, Trelles M, Gonzales F, et al.: Mortality profiles in a country facing epidemiological transition: an analysis of registered data. BMC Public Health. 2009; 9(1): 47. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 2

VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 10 Oct 2019

Author details Author details

¹ Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos, Lima, Peru
² Universidad San Martin de Porres, Lima, Peru
³ Clínica San Felipe, Lima, Peru
⁴ Hospital Nacional Dos de Mayo, Lima, Peru
⁵ Universidad Continental, Huancayo, Peru

Jaime Pajuelo-Ramírez
Roles: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Project Administration, Writing – Original Draft Preparation

Harold Torres-Aparcana
Roles: Formal Analysis, Methodology, Supervision, Visualization, Writing – Review & Editing

Rosa Agüero-Zamora
Roles: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – Review & Editing

Antonio M. Quispe
Roles: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Review & Editing

Competing interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information

The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work.

Article Versions (2)

version 2

Revised

Published: 27 Dec 2019, 8:1738

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.20707.2

version 1

Published: 10 Oct 2019, 8:1738

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.20707.1

Copyright

© 2019 Pajuelo-Ramírez J et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Download

Export To

metrics

	Views	Downloads
F1000Research	-	-
PubMed Central Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.	-	-

Citations

0

SEE MORE DETAILS

CITE

how to cite this article

Pajuelo-Ramírez J, Torres-Aparcana H, Agüero-Zamora R and Quispe AM. Altitude and its inverse association with abdominal obesity in an Andean country: a cross-sectional study [version 1; peer review: 2 approved, 1 not approved] F1000Research 2019, 8:1738 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.20707.1)

NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.

track

receive updates on this article

Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Current Reviewer Status: ?

Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW HIDE

ApprovedThe paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested

Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.

Not approvedFundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions

Version 1

VERSION 1

PUBLISHED 10 Oct 2019

Views

8

Reviewer Report 05 Dec 2019

Yuri Arnold Dominguez, National Institute of Endocrinology (INEN), Havana, Cuba

Approved

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.22774.r56783

In the topic number 1 and referring specifically to what was written in paragraph number one of the Introduction, I consider that not only the abdominal waist is the only predictor of abdominal obesity, there are other indicators as important ... Continue reading

In the topic number 1 and referring specifically to what was written in paragraph number one of the Introduction, I consider that not only the abdominal waist is the only predictor of abdominal obesity, there are other indicators as important as that, such as the Waist Index- size (taking into account that the Peruvian population prevails people with short stature), the waist waist index, the conicity index, which are usually more accurate than mere measurement than the abdominal circumference. I recommend that this investigation be continued in a larger sample , that it is even necessary to evaluate risk factors such as physical activity and diet, which are major confounders.

Otherwise I catalogue the article as excellent.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Partly
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Yes
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Yes

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: Epidemiology of diabetes.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

CITE

Report a concern

Respond or Comment

Views

15

Reviewer Report 25 Nov 2019

Ugo Fedeli, Regional Epidemiology Service, Padua, Italy

Approved

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.22774.r56784

The paper is interesting and well written. I have few suggestions:

Methods, statistical analysis: please add some detail on interaction terms introduced in the log-binomial regression models; also in Results some interpretation about estimates obtained for the ... Continue reading

The paper is interesting and well written. I have few suggestions:

Methods, statistical analysis: please add some detail on interaction terms introduced in the log-binomial regression models; also in Results some interpretation about estimates obtained for the altitude x gender and altitude x age group would be useful for the reader.

Page 6, second paragraph: it is stated that abdominal obesity and obesity prevalence were higher across rural areas than in urban areas; possibly the contrary should be reported.

Table 5: my advice is to report in three separate columns estimates for unadjusted PR, adjusted PR without interaction terms, and adjusted PR with interaction terms (full model). It is not clear if PR reported in the Abstract are obtained from the full model; my advice is to report in the Abstract PR obtained by the adjusted model without interaction terms.

In Discussion it is reported that differences in socio-economic status might be captured by the urban/rural variable. Are there also differences in ethnic background by altitude?

Page 9, findings are summarized of a previous study reporting a higher percentage of overweight and other cardiovascular risk factors in people living above 3000 m vs. those living below 1000 m. However, these results seem to be in contrast with the present study; please explain.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Yes
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Partly
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Partly
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Yes

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: epidemiology of non-communicable diseases

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

CITE

Report a concern

Respond or Comment

Views

38

Reviewer Report 04 Nov 2019

Antonio Bernabe-Ortiz, CRONICAS Center of Excellence in Chronic Diseases, Cayetano Heredia University, Lima, Peru

Not Approved

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.22774.r55852

Overall comment:
This paper looks for the association between altitude and abdominal obesity. Although the idea is not novel, extra reports using existing data can help to understand better this. I would expect more details regarding the variables (exposure ... Continue reading

Overall comment:
This paper looks for the association between altitude and abdominal obesity. Although the idea is not novel, extra reports using existing data can help to understand better this. I would expect more details regarding the variables (exposure and outcome) used in the analysis. Moreover, any other kind of models, not that using only three categories for altitude would be more relevant, or verifying if the association is similar for overweight and obesity. This analysis can be improved by looking extra ways to see the association more than the traditional form to check that, for example, using linear regression if possible or polynomic models (quadratic at least).

Major concerns:

Abstract:
Please change it accordingly to comments below.

Introduction:

Obesity has different indicators and in the reference is used similarly for BMI (overall obesity), waist circumference (abdominal obesity), etc. Please be careful and consistent with words used.
Some longitudinal studies have been published showing the association of interest and they have not been considered here (e.g. PMID: 29472520¹).
What is the novelty in this paper? Is it altitude? Apparently not as shown in the longitudinal paper... is it the rurality? Usually rural areas are in high altitudes. Is waist circumference an easy measure to do? Is it routinely done?
How the usefulness of waist circumference in high altitudes is evaluated in this paper? I think that is no part of this study as pointed out in the last part of the first paragraph.
Any reference for the last sentence of the second paragraph?
Third paragraph: is the risk of obesity decreasing due to altitude? The reference is a cross sectional study, so is it possible to talk about risk?

Methods:

Study design: why this study is multicentric? How many centers were included? Please explain.
If the ENAHO is conducted yearly, why to use the 2013 ENAHO? Why not to use the last one available?
Please explain how the sampling was done? Stratified by what? How many stages does the sampling have?
Was any criterion related to time living in high altitude (e.g. at least 6 months living in the city/area)? Are 30 days enough to see the potential impact of altitude on health?
Why households with 10 or more inhabitants were excluded? Any explanation? What proportion of households in Peru has 10 dwellers or more? Are these decisions biasing results?
How altitude was measured? Was GPS used for this? Only a simple calculation of the altitude of the city was used? Please explain. Usually, 2500 meters is used as the cutoff and not 3000... Since this variable is the main exposure, details should be given to understand if any misclassification could be introduced...
Only those aged 20 years and more were included in the analysis? How about those between 18 to 20 years or those younger?
How the rural index was built? Explain please... Any reference helping to understand this? I am pretty sure the ENAHO stratifies the sample by urban/rural settings... was not the case this time?
Categorization of BMI is presented in different way compared to how it was analyzed... please be consistent in definitions used
“We assessed bivariate association using...” Association of what? Do you mean correlation between definitions of abdominal obesity? What was the gold standard?
“Thus, we used a log-binomial...” Why education level or socioeconomic status were not confounders? As they are associated with obesity and people in high altitude settings, mainly rural, tend to have low SES and low education... should be they confounders? I know these variables are available in the ENAHO survey... why were they excluded?
Ethic statement: where the dataset is available... add the link and how to get the data... I know a dataset has been added using Figshare, but that it not all the info available in the ENAHO dataset.

Results:

What do you mean for “703 different locations”? This part is not explained in the Methods section. Were they the areas with altitude information?
Education level and socioeconomic status should be included in the info as they are available in the ENAHO dataset.
Waist to height ratio (definition) should be included since the methods section.
Was obesity prevalence standardized by age? Authors always said that the prevalence of obesity was lower in high altitude, but that is only the crude estimate... at least age standardization (if possible by sex also) must be conducted to say something like that.
“... we found that using the ATP III cutoff resulted in a stronger correlation with obesity”... what kind of obesity? Defined by BMI? By WC? By WtHr?
Please use appropriate graphs to see the inverted-u shape relationship... three points are not enough... use appropriate linear regression models? Or used more categories in the exposure variable... for example, an increase every 500 meters...
Would be good to know if stratification variables were effect modifiers? What was the test used for this? Although this was defined a priori, it would be good to have these estimates...

Discussion:

I would suggest discussing about the relevance of this paper in the context of other papers (mainly those longitudinal).
What is the relevance of the findings? This is not clear as apparently the discussion is used only to compare results with other studies. I would also suggest to tone down some of the sentences as this is only a cross sectional study and not better analysis has been done to improve the understanding of the association between altitude and obesity prevalence.

Minor concerns:

Correct grammar spelling.
Paper should be reviewed by an English native speaker.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

No
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

No
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

No
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Partly
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

No
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Partly

References

1. Carrillo-Larco RM, Miranda JJ, Gilman RH, Checkley W, et al.: Trajectories of body mass index and waist circumference in four Peruvian settings at different level of urbanisation: the CRONICAS Cohort Study.J Epidemiol Community Health. 72 (5): 397-403 PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Competing Interests: I know one of the authors, but we have never worked together.

Reviewer Expertise: Noncommunicable diseases (type 2 diabetes, hypertension and obesity).

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to state that I do not consider it to be of an acceptable scientific standard, for reasons outlined above.

CITE

Report a concern

Respond or Comment

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 2

VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 10 Oct 2019

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

	Invited Reviewers
	1	2	3
Version 2 (revision) 27 Dec 19	read
Version 1 10 Oct 19	read	read	read

Antonio Bernabe-Ortiz, Cayetano Heredia University, Lima, Peru
Ugo Fedeli, Regional Epidemiology Service, Padua, Italy
Yuri Arnold Dominguez, National Institute of Endocrinology (INEN), Havana, Cuba

Comments on this article

All Comments(0)

Add a comment

Sign up for content alerts

Browse by related subjects

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

38 Views

07 Jan 2020 | for Version 2

Antonio Bernabe-Ortiz, CRONICAS Center of Excellence in Chronic Diseases, Cayetano Heredia University, Lima, Peru

38 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Not Approved

Although authors have improved the manuscript, they have not addressed all the comments submitted in the first review.

MAJOR CONCERNS:

Methods:

If the ENAHO is conducted yearly, why to use the 2013 ENAHO? Why not to use the last one available? This needs to be explained or at least considered as a limitation.
Was any criterion related to time living in high altitude (e.g. at least 6 months living in the city/area)? Are 30 days enough to see the potential impact of altitude on health? If not, please, add as limitation.
How altitude was measured? Was GPS used for this? Only a simple calculation of the altitude of the city was used? Please explain. Usually, 2500 meters is used as the cutoff and not 3000... Since this variable is the main exposure, details should be given to understand if any misclassification could be introduced...
Only those aged 20 years and more were included in the analysis? How about those between 18 to 20 years or those younger… why they were not included?
Why education level and socioeconomic status were not confounders? As they are associated with obesity and people in high altitude settings, mainly rural, tend to have low SES and low education... should be they confounders? These variables are available in the ENAHO survey and must be included in analysis or demonstrate why not to include them?

Results:

What do you mean for “703 different locations”? This part is not explained in the Methods section. Were they the areas with altitude information?
Obesity prevalence must be standardized by age. Authors always said that the prevalence of obesity was lower in high altitude, but that is only the crude estimate... at least age standardization (if possible by sex also) must be conducted to say something like that.
Please use appropriate graphs to see the inverted-u shape relationship... three points are not enough... use appropriate linear regression models? Or used more categories in the exposure variable... for example, an increase every 500 meters...

Discussion:

What is the relevance of the findings? This is not clear as apparently the discussion is used only to compare results with other studies. A paragraph is needed to show the public health relevance of this association.
I would also suggest to tone down some of the sentences as this is only a cross sectional study and not better analysis has been done to improve the understanding of the association between altitude and obesity prevalence.

MINOR CONCERNS:

Change “Peruvian National Institute of Statistics and Information” for “Peruvian National Institute of Statistics and Informatics”.
Please in Methods explain how what unreliable data defined.
Usually there are no references in the Results section (verify #24).

Competing Interests

I know one of the authors, but we never worked together.

Reviewer Expertise

Noncommunicable diseases (type 2 diabetes, hypertension and obesity).

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to state that I do not consider it to be of an acceptable scientific standard, for reasons outlined above.

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

8 Views

05 Dec 2019 | for Version 1

Yuri Arnold Dominguez, National Institute of Endocrinology (INEN), Havana, Cuba

8 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Approved

In the topic number 1 and referring specifically to what was written in paragraph number one of the Introduction, I consider that not only the abdominal waist is the only predictor of abdominal obesity, there are other indicators as important as that, such as the Waist Index- size (taking into account that the Peruvian population prevails people with short stature), the waist waist index, the conicity index, which are usually more accurate than mere measurement than the abdominal circumference. I recommend that this investigation be continued in a larger sample , that it is even necessary to evaluate risk factors such as physical activity and diet, which are major confounders.

Otherwise I catalogue the article as excellent.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Partly
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Yes
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Yes

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

Epidemiology of diabetes.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

15 Views

25 Nov 2019 | for Version 1

Ugo Fedeli, Regional Epidemiology Service, Padua, Italy

15 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Approved

The paper is interesting and well written. I have few suggestions:

Methods, statistical analysis: please add some detail on interaction terms introduced in the log-binomial regression models; also in Results some interpretation about estimates obtained for the altitude x gender and altitude x age group would be useful for the reader.

Page 6, second paragraph: it is stated that abdominal obesity and obesity prevalence were higher across rural areas than in urban areas; possibly the contrary should be reported.

Table 5: my advice is to report in three separate columns estimates for unadjusted PR, adjusted PR without interaction terms, and adjusted PR with interaction terms (full model). It is not clear if PR reported in the Abstract are obtained from the full model; my advice is to report in the Abstract PR obtained by the adjusted model without interaction terms.

In Discussion it is reported that differences in socio-economic status might be captured by the urban/rural variable. Are there also differences in ethnic background by altitude?

Page 9, findings are summarized of a previous study reporting a higher percentage of overweight and other cardiovascular risk factors in people living above 3000 m vs. those living below 1000 m. However, these results seem to be in contrast with the present study; please explain.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Yes
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Partly
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Partly
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Yes

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

epidemiology of non-communicable diseases

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

38 Views

04 Nov 2019 | for Version 1

Antonio Bernabe-Ortiz, CRONICAS Center of Excellence in Chronic Diseases, Cayetano Heredia University, Lima, Peru

38 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Not Approved

Overall comment:
This paper looks for the association between altitude and abdominal obesity. Although the idea is not novel, extra reports using existing data can help to understand better this. I would expect more details regarding the variables (exposure and outcome) used in the analysis. Moreover, any other kind of models, not that using only three categories for altitude would be more relevant, or verifying if the association is similar for overweight and obesity. This analysis can be improved by looking extra ways to see the association more than the traditional form to check that, for example, using linear regression if possible or polynomic models (quadratic at least).

Major concerns:

Abstract:
Please change it accordingly to comments below.

Introduction:

Obesity has different indicators and in the reference is used similarly for BMI (overall obesity), waist circumference (abdominal obesity), etc. Please be careful and consistent with words used.
Some longitudinal studies have been published showing the association of interest and they have not been considered here (e.g. PMID: 29472520¹).
What is the novelty in this paper? Is it altitude? Apparently not as shown in the longitudinal paper... is it the rurality? Usually rural areas are in high altitudes. Is waist circumference an easy measure to do? Is it routinely done?
How the usefulness of waist circumference in high altitudes is evaluated in this paper? I think that is no part of this study as pointed out in the last part of the first paragraph.
Any reference for the last sentence of the second paragraph?
Third paragraph: is the risk of obesity decreasing due to altitude? The reference is a cross sectional study, so is it possible to talk about risk?

Methods:

Study design: why this study is multicentric? How many centers were included? Please explain.
If the ENAHO is conducted yearly, why to use the 2013 ENAHO? Why not to use the last one available?
Please explain how the sampling was done? Stratified by what? How many stages does the sampling have?
Was any criterion related to time living in high altitude (e.g. at least 6 months living in the city/area)? Are 30 days enough to see the potential impact of altitude on health?
Why households with 10 or more inhabitants were excluded? Any explanation? What proportion of households in Peru has 10 dwellers or more? Are these decisions biasing results?
How altitude was measured? Was GPS used for this? Only a simple calculation of the altitude of the city was used? Please explain. Usually, 2500 meters is used as the cutoff and not 3000... Since this variable is the main exposure, details should be given to understand if any misclassification could be introduced...
Only those aged 20 years and more were included in the analysis? How about those between 18 to 20 years or those younger?
How the rural index was built? Explain please... Any reference helping to understand this? I am pretty sure the ENAHO stratifies the sample by urban/rural settings... was not the case this time?
Categorization of BMI is presented in different way compared to how it was analyzed... please be consistent in definitions used
“We assessed bivariate association using...” Association of what? Do you mean correlation between definitions of abdominal obesity? What was the gold standard?
“Thus, we used a log-binomial...” Why education level or socioeconomic status were not confounders? As they are associated with obesity and people in high altitude settings, mainly rural, tend to have low SES and low education... should be they confounders? I know these variables are available in the ENAHO survey... why were they excluded?
Ethic statement: where the dataset is available... add the link and how to get the data... I know a dataset has been added using Figshare, but that it not all the info available in the ENAHO dataset.

Results:

What do you mean for “703 different locations”? This part is not explained in the Methods section. Were they the areas with altitude information?
Education level and socioeconomic status should be included in the info as they are available in the ENAHO dataset.
Waist to height ratio (definition) should be included since the methods section.
Was obesity prevalence standardized by age? Authors always said that the prevalence of obesity was lower in high altitude, but that is only the crude estimate... at least age standardization (if possible by sex also) must be conducted to say something like that.
“... we found that using the ATP III cutoff resulted in a stronger correlation with obesity”... what kind of obesity? Defined by BMI? By WC? By WtHr?
Please use appropriate graphs to see the inverted-u shape relationship... three points are not enough... use appropriate linear regression models? Or used more categories in the exposure variable... for example, an increase every 500 meters...
Would be good to know if stratification variables were effect modifiers? What was the test used for this? Although this was defined a priori, it would be good to have these estimates...

Discussion:

I would suggest discussing about the relevance of this paper in the context of other papers (mainly those longitudinal).
What is the relevance of the findings? This is not clear as apparently the discussion is used only to compare results with other studies. I would also suggest to tone down some of the sentences as this is only a cross sectional study and not better analysis has been done to improve the understanding of the association between altitude and obesity prevalence.

Minor concerns:

Correct grammar spelling.
Paper should be reviewed by an English native speaker.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

No
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

No
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

No
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Partly
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

No
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Partly

References

1. Carrillo-Larco RM, Miranda JJ, Gilman RH, Checkley W, et al.: Trajectories of body mass index and waist circumference in four Peruvian settings at different level of urbanisation: the CRONICAS Cohort Study.J Epidemiol Community Health. 72 (5): 397-403 PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Competing Interests

I know one of the authors, but we have never worked together.

Reviewer Expertise

Noncommunicable diseases (type 2 diabetes, hypertension and obesity).

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to state that I do not consider it to be of an acceptable scientific standard, for reasons outlined above.

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

[1] 1. GBD 2015 Obesity Collaborators, Afshin A, Forouzanfar MH, et al.: Health Effects of Overweight and Obesity in 195 Countries over 25 Years. N Engl J Med. 2017; 377(1): 13–27. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[2] 2. Guh DP, Zhang W, Bansback N, et al.: The incidence of co-morbidities related to obesity and overweight: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Public Health. 2009; 9: 88. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[3] 3. Yusuf S, Hawken S, Ounpuu S, et al.: Effect of potentially modifiable risk factors associated with myocardial infarction in 52 countries (the INTERHEART study): case-control study. Lancet. 2004; 364(9438): 937–952. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[4] 4. Hoefle G, Saely CH, Aczel S, et al.: Impact of total and central obesity on vascular mortality in patients undergoing coronary angiography. Int J Obes (Lond). 2005; 29(7): 785–791. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[5] 5. Seidell JC, Björntorp P, Sjöström L, et al.: Regional distribution of muscle and fat mass in men--new insight into the risk of abdominal obesity using computed tomography. Int J Obes. 1989; 13(3): 289–303. PubMed Abstract

[6] 6. Ross R, Shaw KD, Martel Y, et al.: Adipose tissue distribution measured by magnetic resonance imaging in obese women. Am J Clin Nutr. 1993; 57(4): 470–475. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[7] 7. de Koning L, Merchant AT, Pogue J, et al.: Waist circumference and waist-to-hip ratio as predictors of cardiovascular events: meta-regression analysis of prospective studies. Eur Heart J. 2007; 28(7): 850–856. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[8] 8. World Health Organization: Waist Circumference and Waist-Hip Ratio: Report of a WHO Expert Consultation, Geneva, 8-11 December 2008. World Health Organization; 2011. Reference Source

[9] 9. Pajuelo Ramírez J, Ramírez JP: La obesidad en el Perú. Anales de la Facultad de Medicina. 2017; 78(2): 73. Publisher Full Text

[10] 10. Voss JD, Masuoka P, Webber BJ, et al.: Association of elevation, urbanization and ambient temperature with obesity prevalence in the United States. Int J Obes (Lond). 2013; 37(10): 1407–12. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[11] 11. Woolcott OO, Gutierrez C, Castillo OA, et al.: Inverse association between altitude and obesity: A prevalence study among andean and low-altitude adult individuals of Peru. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2016; 24(4): 929–37. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[12] 12. Pajuelo Ramírez J, Miranda Cuadros M, Bernui Leo I: Asociación entre altitud de residencia y malnutrición en niños peruanos menores de cinco años [Association between altitude of residence and malnutrition in Peruvian children under five years of age]. Acta Med Peru. 2017; 34(4): 259–265. Reference Source

[13] 13. Instituto Nacional de Estadística e Informática (INEI): Peru - Encuesta Nacional de Hogares Sobre Condiciones de Vida y Pobreza 2017. [National Institute of Statistics and Informatics (INEI). Peru - National Household Survey on Living Conditions and Poverty 2017.] Reference Source

[14] 14. Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults: Executive Summary of The Third Report of The National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, And Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol In Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III). JAMA. 2001; 285(19): 2486–2497. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[15] 15. Han TS, van Leer EM, Seidell JC, et al.: Waist circumference action levels in the identification of cardiovascular risk factors: prevalence study in a random sample. BMJ. 1995; 311(7017): 1401–5. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[16] 16. Asociación Latinoamericana de Diabetes (ALAD): Epidemiología, Diagnóstico, Control, Prevención y Tratamiento del Síndrome Metabólico en Adultos. [Latin American Diabetes Association (ALAD). Epidemiology, Diagnosis, Control, Prevention and Treatment of Metabolic Syndrome in Adults]. Rev Asoc Latinoam Diab. 2010; 18(1): 25–44. Reference Source

[17] 17. Alberti KG, Zimmet P, Shaw J: Metabolic syndrome--a new world-wide definition. A Consensus Statement from the International Diabetes Federation. Diabet Med. 2006; 23(5): 469–480. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[18] 18. Browning LM, Hsieh SD, Ashwell M: A systematic review of waist-to-height ratio as a screening tool for the prediction of cardiovascular disease and diabetes: 0·5 could be a suitable global boundary value. Nutr Res Rev. 2010; 23(2): 247–269. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[19] 19. World Health Organization: Obesity: preventing and managing the global epidemic. Report of a WHO consultation. 2000. Reference Source

[20] 20. Tajeu GS, Sen B, Allison DB, et al.: Misuse of odds ratios in obesity literature: an empirical analysis of published studies. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2012; 20(8): 1726–1731. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[21] 21. Espelt A, Marí-Dell'Olmo M, Penelo E, et al.: Applied Prevalence Ratio estimation with different Regression models: An example from a cross-national study on substance use research. Adicciones. 2017; 29(2): 105–112. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[22] 22. Pajuelo-Ramírez J, Torres-Aparcana H, Agüero-Zamora R, et al.: Altitude and its inverse association with abdominal obesity in an Andean country: Dataset. 2019. http://www.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.9920234

[23] 23. Instituto Nacional de Estadística e Informática: Peru - Resultados definitivos de los Censos Nacionales 2017: XII de Población, VII de Vivienda y III de Comunidades Indígenas. [National Institute of Statistics and Informatics. Peru - Final Results of the 2017 National Censuses: XII Population, VII Housing and III Indigenous Communities]. 2018. Reference Source

[24] 24. Misra A, Wasir JS, Vikram NK: Waist circumference criteria for the diagnosis of abdominal obesity are not applicable uniformly to all populations and ethnic groups. Nutrition. 2005; 21(9): 969–976. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[25] 25. Aschner P, Buendía R, Brajkovich I, et al.: Determination of the cutoff point for waist circumference that establishes the presence of abdominal obesity in Latin American men and women. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2011; 93(2): 243–247. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[26] 26. Medina-Lezama J, Pastorius CA, Zea-Diaz H, et al.: Optimal definitions for abdominal obesity and the metabolic syndrome in Andean Hispanics: the PREVENCION study. Diabetes Care. 2010; 33(6): 1385–1388. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[27] 27. Raposo L, Severo M, Santos AC: Adiposity cut-off points for cardiovascular disease and diabetes risk in the Portuguese population: The PORMETS study.Tauler P, ed. PLoS One. 2018; 13(1): e0191641. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[28] 28. Wang H, Liu A, Zhao T, et al.: Comparison of anthropometric indices for predicting the risk of metabolic syndrome and its components in Chinese adults: a prospective, longitudinal study. BMJ Open. 2017; 7(9): e016062. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[29] 29. Patel SA, Deepa M, Shivashankar R, et al.: Comparison of multiple obesity indices for cardiovascular disease risk classification in South Asian adults: The CARRS Study. Kiechl S, ed. PLoS One. 2017; 12(4): e0174251. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[30] 30. Pajuelo J, Sánchez-Abanto J, Torres HL, et al.: Prevalencia del síndrome metabólico en pobladores peruanos por debajo de 1 000 y por encima de los 3 000 msnm [Prevalence of the metabolic syndrome in Peruvian settlers below 1,000 and above 3,000 meters above sea level]. Anales de la Facultad de Medicina. 2012; 73(2): 101–106. Publisher Full Text

[31] 31. Carrillo-Larco RM, Bernabé-Ortiz A, Pillay TD, et al.: Obesity risk in rural, urban and rural-to-urban migrants: prospective results of the PERU MIGRANT study. Int J Obes (Lond). 2016; 40(1): 181–185. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[32] 32. Paye-Huanca EO, Navia-Bueno M de P: Prevalencia y factores de riesgo asociados para sobrepeso y obesidad en la población adulta de la ciudad de La Paz [Prevalence and associated risk factors for overweight and obesity in the adult population of the city of La Paz]- Gestión 2014. Cuad Hosp Clin. 2018; 59: 31–40. Reference Source

[33] 33. Sherpa LY, Deji, Stigum H, et al.: Obesity in Tibetans aged 30-70 living at different altitudes under the north and south faces of Mt. Everest. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2010; 7(4): 1670–1680. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[34] 34. Pajuelo-Ramírez J, Sánchez-Abanto J, Arbañil-Huamán H: Las enfermedades crónicas no transmisibles en el Perú y su relación con la altitud [Chronic noncommunicable diseases in Peru and their relationship with altitude]. Rev Soc Peru Med Interna. 2010; 23(2): 45–52. Reference Source

[35] 35. Sliwa K, Acquah L, Gersh BJ, et al.: Impact of Socioeconomic Status, Ethnicity, and Urbanization on Risk Factor Profiles of Cardiovascular Disease in Africa. Circulation. 2016; 133(12): 1199–1208. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[36] 36. Huicho L, Trelles M, Gonzales F, et al.: Mortality profiles in a country facing epidemiological transition: an analysis of registered data. BMC Public Health. 2009; 9(1): 47. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

Altitude and its inverse association with abdominal obesity in an Andean country: a cross-sectional study

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Methods

Study design

Variables of interest

Statistical analysis

Ethical statement

Results

Characteristics of the study population

Table 1. Peru’s demographics by altitude level.

Prevalence of obesity and abdominal obesity in Peru

Figure 1. Prevalence of abdominal obesity by altitude and by different cutoffs.

Variability of abdominal obesity by different cutoffs in Peru

Table 2. Abdominal obesity prevalence by demographic and nutritional factors at different altitude levels.

Table 3. Correlation between altitude and each of our parameters of interest.

Variability of abdominal obesity by altitude in Peru

Table 4. Obesity and abdominal obesity prevalence by demographic at different altitudes.

Abdominal obesity and its association with altitude in Peru

Figure 2. Prevalence of abdominal obesity (by Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines cutoffs) by age group and altitude.

Abdominal obesity and its associated factors in Peru

Table 5. Factors associated with abdominal obesity (by ATP III) in Peru.

Discussion

Data availability

Underlying data

References

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

Comments on this article

Browse by related subjects

Competing Interests Policy

Stay Updated