Inter-rater and Intra-rater Reliability of Manual Anthropometric Measurements: Impact of Gender Dynamics in a Cross-Sectional Study of Nigerian University Students
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: Accurate anthropometric measurements are essential in clinical practice, sports science, and epidemiological research. However, their reliability may be influenced by methodological and sociocultural factors. This study examined intra and interrater reproducibility of anthropometric measurements, with emphasis on genderrelated influences among undergraduate students at Ebonyi State University, Abakaliki.
Methods: Ninetysix students aged 18–30 years were assessed using standardized ISAK protocols. Parameters included height, weight, head girth, neck girth, arm girth (relaxed and flexed), forearm girth, waist circumference, and gluteal girth. Two trained raters (one male, one female) independently measured both male and female participants to evaluate samegender and crossgender reproducibility. Reliability was analyzed using Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC), Bland–Altman plots, Cronbach’s Alpha, and correlation coefficients. Ethical approval was obtained, and informed consent ensured voluntary participation and confidentiality.
Results: Height and weight demonstrated excellent reproducibility across all groups (ICC > 0.99). In contrast, circumferencebased parameters, particularly waist and gluteal girth, showed weaker agreement in crossgender assessments (male gluteal girth ICC = 0.426; female gluteal girth ICC = 0.291). Samegender measurements consistently yielded higher reliability, while oppositegender measurements introduced greater variability, especially in culturally sensitive body regions.
Conclusion: While measurement errors cannot be fully eliminated, adherence to standardized protocols and incorporation of gender sensitive approaches significantly enhance accuracy and reproducibility in anthropometric research.
Downloads
Article Details
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The Journal is owned, published and copyrighted by the Nigerian Medical Association, River state Branch. The copyright of papers published are vested in the journal and the publisher. In line with our open access policy and the Creative Commons Attribution License policy authors are allowed to share their work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
This is an open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author.
The use of general descriptive names, trade names, trademarks, and so forth in this publication, even if not specifically identified, does not imply that these names are not protected by the relevant laws and regulations. While the advice and information in this journal are believed to be true and accurate on the date of its going to press, neither the authors, the editors, nor the publisher can accept any legal responsibility for any errors or omissions that may be made. The publisher makes no warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein.
TNHJ also supports open access archiving of articles published in the journal after three months of publication. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g, in institutional repositories or on their website) within the stated period, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access). All requests for permission for open access archiving outside this period should be sent to the editor via email to editor@tnhjph.com.
How to Cite
References
1.Wang M, Song Y, Zhao X, Wang Y, Zhang M. Utilizing anthropometric measurements and 3D scanning for health assessment in clinical practice. Phys Act Health. 2024;8(1):182–96. doi:10.5334/pah.258
2.Kobel S, Kirsten J, Kelso A. Anthropometry – assessment of body composition. Dtsch Z Sportmed. 2022;73(3):106–11. doi:10.5960/dzsm.2022.523
3.Casadei K, Kiel J. Anthropometric measurement. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2022 Sep 26 [cited 2025 Dec 3]. p.1–6. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK537315/ (ncbi.nlm.nih.gov in Bing)
4.Kim M, Qiu X, Wang Y (Arthur). Interrater agreement in genre analysis: A methodological review and a comparison of three measures. Res Methods Appl Linguist. 2024;3(1):100097. doi:10.1016/j.rmal.2024.100097
5.Nel S, de Man J, van den Berg L, Wenhold FAM. Statistical assessment of reliability of anthropometric measurements in the multi-site South African National Dietary Intake Survey 2022. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2024;78(11):1005–13. doi:10.1038/s41430-024-01446-4
6.Perumal N, Namaste S, Qamar H, Aimone A, Bassani DG, Roth DE. Anthropometric data quality assessment in multisurvey studies of child growth. Am J Clin Nutr. 2020;112(2 Suppl):806S–15S. doi:10.1093/ajcn/nqaa153
7.Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;327(8476):307–10. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(86)90837-8
8.Warrier V, Krishan K, Shedge R, Kanchan T. Height assessment. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2023 Jul 25 [cited 2025 Dec 3]. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK551524/ (ncbi.nlm.nih.gov in Bing)
9.Bialocerkowski A. Measurement error and reliability testing: Application to rehabilitation. Int J Ther Rehabil [Internet]. 2008 Oct 1 [cited 2025 Dec 3]. Available from: https://www.academia.edu/125434029/Measurement_error_and_reliability_testing_Application_to_rehabilitation (academia.edu in Bing)
10.Heymsfield SB, Bourgeois B, Ng BK, Sommer MJ, Li X, Shepherd JA. Digital anthropometry: A critical review. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2018;72(5):680–7. doi:10.1038/s41430-018-0145-7
11.Gibson RS. Anthropometric assessment of body composition. In: Principles of Nutritional Assessment. 3rd ed. Oxford University Press; 2023. p.273–98. doi:10.1093/med/9780190071396.003.0012
12.da Silva VS, Vieira MFS. International society for the advancement of kinanthropometry (ISAK) global: International accreditation scheme of the competent anthropometrist. Rev Bras Cineantropom Desempenho Hum. 2020;22:e70536. doi:10.1590/1980-0037.2020v22e70536
13.Leah DO, Omokwa EA, Yakubu SI, Adeyinka NOF, Florence O. Influence of occupational physical activity on anthropometric profile and body composition of bricklayers in Kwara state, Nigeria. Exerc Med. 2018;2:7–12. doi:10.26644/em.2018.007
14.Schober P, Schwarte LA. Correlation coefficients: Appropriate use and interpretation. Anesth Analg. 2018;126(5):1763–8. doi:10.1213/ANE.0000000000002864
15.Njoku C, Oa N, Oa E, Ad S. Impact of gender sensitivity on anthropometric measurements. J Anat Sci. 2023;14:1–8.
16.Brambilla P, Bedogni G, Heo M, Pietrobelli A. Waist circumference-to-height ratio predicts adiposity better than body mass index in children and adolescents. Int J Obes. 2013;37(7):943–6. doi:10.1038/ijo.2013.32
17.Simkus A, Coolen-Maturi T, Coolen FPA, Bendtsen C. Statistical perspectives on reproducibility: Definitions and challenges. J Stat Theory Pract. 2025;19(3):1–20. doi:10.1007/s42519-025-00347-9
18.Nel S, de Man J, van den Berg L, Wenhold FAM. Statistical assessment of reliability of anthropometric measurements in the multi-site South African National Dietary Intake Survey 2022. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2024;78(11):1005–13. doi:10.1038/s41430-024-01446-4
19.Downing SM. Reliability: On the reproducibility of assessment data. Med Educ. 2004;38(9):1006–12. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2004.01932.