• Archives of Obesity and Metabolism
• /
• v.1 no.1
• /
• pp.33-38
• /
• 2022

Although it has been confirmed that excessive body fat increases health risks and all-cause mortality, several epidemiological studies have reported that overweight or obesity in patients with chronic diseases and in older adults is advantageous with respect to mortality. Several mechanisms have been proposed to explain the biological basis of this obesity paradox. The marked heterogeneity of findings observed across studies and the possibility of systematic errors in these studies have cast doubt on the actual existence of the obesity paradox. However, the obesity paradox questioned the validity of body mass index as the best indicator for obesity in terms of predicting its comorbidities and urges clinicians to focus more on changes in body composition and related metabolic derangements, rather than body weight per se.

• Health Policy and Management
• /
• v.30 no.4
• /
• pp.493-504
• /
• 2020

Background: There have been many studies on the associations between body mass index (BMI) and cognitive function. However, no study has ever compared the associations across the methods of categorizing BMI. In this study, we aimed to fill the gap in the previous studies and examine whether the obesity paradox is valid in the risk of cognitive function. Methods: Of the 10,254 people aged 45 and older from the Korean Longitudinal Study of Ageing from 2006 to 2016, 8,970 people were finalized as the study population. The dependent variable was whether a person has a normal cognitive function or not, and the independent variables of interest were BMI categorized by the World Health Organization Western Pacific Regional Office (WHO-WPRO) method, the WHO method, and a 10-group method. Covariates included sociodemographic factors, health behavior factors, and health status factors. A generalized linear mixed model analysis with a logit link was used. Results: In the adjusted model with all covariates, first, in the case of BMI categories of the WHO-WPRO method, underweight (odds ratio [OR], 1.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-1.17), overweight (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.35-1.36), and obese (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.33-1.34) groups were more likely to have a normal cognitive function than a normal-weight group. Next, in the case of BMI categories of the WHO method, compared to a normal-weight group, underweight (OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.14-1.16) and overweight (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.06-1.07) groups were more likely to have a normal cognitive function; however, obese (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.61-0.63) group was less likely to have it. Lastly, in the case of the 10-group method, as BMI increased, the likelihood to have a normal cognitive function changed like a wave, reaching a global top at group-7 (26.5 kg/㎡ ≤ BMI <28.0 kg/㎡). Conclusion: The associations between BMI and cognitive function differed according to how BMI was categorized among people aged 45 and older in Korea, which suggests that cognitive function may be positively associated with BMI in some categories of BMI but negatively in its other categories. Health policies to reduce cognitive impairment need to consider this association between BMI and cognitive function.

• Communications for Statistical Applications and Methods
• /
• v.25 no.5
• /
• pp.545-557
• /
• 2018

The inclusion of covariates in the model often affects not only the estimates of meaningful variables of interest but also its statistical significance. Such gap between statistical and subject-matter significance is a critical issue in huge sample studies. A popular huge sample study, the sample cohort data from Korean National Health Insurance Service, showed such gap of significance in the inference for the effect of obesity on cause of mortality, requiring careful consideration. In this regard, this paper proposes a sample size calibration method based on a Monte Carlo t (or z)-test approach without Monte Carlo simulation, and also proposes a test procedure for subject-matter significance using this calibration method in order to complement the deflated p-value in the huge sample size. Our calibration method shows no subject-matter significance of the obesity paradox regardless of race, sex, and age groups, unlike traditional statistical suggestions based on p-values.