PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Shuey, Megan M.
AU  - Huang, Shi
AU  - Levinson, Rebecca T.
AU  - Farber-Eger, Eric
AU  - Cahill, Katherine N.
AU  - Beckman, Joshua A.
AU  - Koethe, John R.
AU  - Silver, Heidi J.
AU  - Niswender, Kevin D.
AU  - Cox, Nancy J.
AU  - Harrell, Frank E.
AU  - Wells, Quinn S.
TI  - Bias measurement in, bias results out: how an assumption free height adjusted weight model outperforms body mass index
AID  - 10.1101/2020.12.22.20248739
DP  - 2020 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2020.12.22.20248739
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/12/24/2020.12.22.20248739.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/12/24/2020.12.22.20248739.full
AB  - Objective Body mass index (BMI) is the most commonly used predictor of weight-related comorbidities and outcomes. However, the presumed relationship between height and weight intrinsic to BMI may introduce bias with respect to prediction of clinical outcomes. Using Vanderbilt University Medical Center’s deidentified electronic health records and landmark methodology, we performed a series of analyses comparing the performance of models representing weight and height as separate interacting variables to models using BMI.Methods Model prediction was evaluated with respect to established weight-related cardiometabolic traits, metabolic syndrome and its components hypertension, diabetes mellitus, low high-density lipoprotein, and elevated triglycerides, as well as cardiovascular outcomes, atrial fibrillation, coronary artery disease, heart failure, and peripheral artery disease. Model performance was evaluated using likelihood ratio, R2, and Somers’ Dxy rank correlation. Differences in model predictions were visualized using heatmaps.Results Regardless of outcome, the maximally flexible model had a higher likelihood ratio, R2, and Somers’ Dxy rank correlation for event-free prediction probability compared to the BMI model. Performance differed based on the outcome and across the height and weight range.Conclusions Compared to BMI, modeling height and weight as independent, interacting variables results in less bias and improved predictive accuracy for all tested traits.What is already known about this subject?Body mass index, derived from collected height and weight measures, is an imperfect proxy measure of body fat composition often used in medical research.What are the new findings in your manuscript?We demonstrate how BMI introduces complex non-uniform biases across outcome and height-weight space.How might your results change the direction of research or the focus of clinical practice?Modeling height and weight as separate, non-linear, interacting variables improves clinical prediction across the complete spectrum of heights and weights for all clinical out-comes.Competing Interest StatementJ. Beckman declares potential conflicts with Amgen, Bayer, Glaxo Smith Kline, Janssen, Novartis, and Sanofi in the past twelve months. All other authors declare no conflicts of interest.Funding StatementThe dataset used for the analyses described was obtained from the Vanderbilt University Medical Center Synthetic Derivative, which is supported by institutional funding, the 1S10RR025141-01 instrumentation award, and by the CTSA grant UL1TR000445 from National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences/National Institutes of Health. The work was supported by an American Heart Association strategically focused research network award, 17SFRN33520017. In addition, FE Harrell's work on this paper was supported by CTSA award No. UL1 TR002243 from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent official views of the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences or the National Institutes of Health.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The project data was determined to meet the criteria for designation as non-Human subjects and approved by the Vanderbilt University Medical Center's IRB.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data is available upon request to the corresponding author.