Diabetology & Metabolic Syndrome

Table 4 Discrimination performance of parameters to detect ≥ 2 metabolic risk factors^a excluding waist circumference in females

From: Identifying metabolic syndrome in migrant Asian Indian adults with anthropometric and visceral fat action points

	AUC (95% CI)	P-value vs. waist	Threshold-specific metric
	AUC (95% CI)	P-value vs. waist	Cut-point^b	Sensitivity (%)	Specificity (%)	PPV (%)	NPV (%)	Accuracy (%)
Waist	0.65 (0.53–0.77)	–	79 cm	97	32	42	32	53
Waist:height ratio	0.66 (0.54–0.78)	0.59	0.50	93	33	42	90	53
Waist:hip ratio	0.56 (0.42–0.69)	0.11	0.90	24	88	50	69	66
Conicity index	0.53 (0.41–0.66)	0.02	1.22	55	56	39	71	56
SD, DXA	0.70 (0.59–0.82)	0.13	19 cm	62	72	53	79	69
SD, anthropometric^c	0.68 (0.54–0.82)	0.44	21.8 cm	67	69	54	79	68
Suprailiac SFT	0.69 (0.58–0.81)	0.51	29 mm	69	63	49	80	65
BMI	0.69 (0.57–0.80)	0.40	24.5 kg/m²	83	51	46	85	62
Body adiposity index	0.62 (0.50–0.75)	0.66	32%	83	46	44	84	58
VFM, DXA	0.68 (0.57–0.80)	0.16	112 g	62	72	53	79	69
VFM, predicted^d	0.69 (0.57–0.80)	0.48	95 g	86	49	46	88	62

CI confidence interval; DXA dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry; NPV negative predictive value; PPV positive predictive value; SD sagittal diameter; SFT skinfold thickness; VFM visceral fat mass; waist waist circumference
^aIDF criteria for metabolic syndrome other than waist circumference
^bBased on maximum Youden index
^cn = 57 (25 measurements missing)
^dVFM (g) = 1.415 × WC (cm) + 3.381 × BMI (kg/m²) + 0.599 × Age (y) − 129.803 (R² = 0.68, standard error of estimate = 22.3 g)

Back to article page

ISSN: 1758-5996

Contact us

Submission enquiries: jacinth.kennady@springernature.com
General enquiries: info@biomedcentral.com