Evaluation of a body height and weight harmony among university students

IF 0.8 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Physical Education of Students Pub Date : 2022-12-28 DOI:10.15561/20755279.2022.0607
Stan Nowak, I. Zanevskyy
{"title":"Evaluation of a body height and weight harmony among university students","authors":"Stan Nowak, I. Zanevskyy","doi":"10.15561/20755279.2022.0607","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background and Study Aim. A harmony between the body weight and height is one of the most important sign of the right body composition. The aim of this research was to compare objective and subjective evaluations of the body weight and height correlation by university students. \nMaterial and Methods. Students of three years Bachelor programs in the humanistic university were investigated: 137 males in the age of 22.1±1.7 years old, body height – 180.0±7.9 cm, body weight – 79.6±12.3 kg; 281 females in the age of 21.5±2.1 years old, body height – 166.4±6.0 cm, body weight – 59.6±8.9 kg. During the lessons of Physical Education, students were asked to evaluate mentally their body weight value using three categories: normal, overweight, and underweight. A body weight value was evaluated using BMI model too. Correlation between results of these two evaluations was determined using the Pearson interclass correlation coefficient. \nResults. One way ANOVA showed relatively small differences between BMI values of three studied groups: (p=0.235). Within groups variation was in the medium interval: from V=11.4% in the Nursing group up to 16.6% – in the Physical Education group. Totally for all the participants, Pearson interclass correlation showed moderate significant correlation (r=0.354, p<0.001) between results of the objective as BMI values and subjective evaluations as data received from a special questionnaire. \nConclusions. Comparison of the objective evaluation results of body weight by BMI and results of subjective evaluation regarding the body weight were compared vs. results evaluated mentally by students. Subjective evaluated results very good met results obtained from BMI values. Corresponding error appeared negligible small. Statistical hypothesis regarding a common general population these two samples was accepted.","PeriodicalId":51897,"journal":{"name":"Physical Education of Students","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physical Education of Students","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15561/20755279.2022.0607","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and Study Aim. A harmony between the body weight and height is one of the most important sign of the right body composition. The aim of this research was to compare objective and subjective evaluations of the body weight and height correlation by university students. Material and Methods. Students of three years Bachelor programs in the humanistic university were investigated: 137 males in the age of 22.1±1.7 years old, body height – 180.0±7.9 cm, body weight – 79.6±12.3 kg; 281 females in the age of 21.5±2.1 years old, body height – 166.4±6.0 cm, body weight – 59.6±8.9 kg. During the lessons of Physical Education, students were asked to evaluate mentally their body weight value using three categories: normal, overweight, and underweight. A body weight value was evaluated using BMI model too. Correlation between results of these two evaluations was determined using the Pearson interclass correlation coefficient. Results. One way ANOVA showed relatively small differences between BMI values of three studied groups: (p=0.235). Within groups variation was in the medium interval: from V=11.4% in the Nursing group up to 16.6% – in the Physical Education group. Totally for all the participants, Pearson interclass correlation showed moderate significant correlation (r=0.354, p<0.001) between results of the objective as BMI values and subjective evaluations as data received from a special questionnaire. Conclusions. Comparison of the objective evaluation results of body weight by BMI and results of subjective evaluation regarding the body weight were compared vs. results evaluated mentally by students. Subjective evaluated results very good met results obtained from BMI values. Corresponding error appeared negligible small. Statistical hypothesis regarding a common general population these two samples was accepted.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
大学生身高体重和谐度评价
背景与研究目的。体重和身高之间的和谐是正确身体构成的最重要标志之一。本研究的目的是比较大学生对体重和身高相关性的客观评价和主观评价。材料和方法。调查对象为人文大学本科三年级学生:男性137人,年龄22.1±1.7岁,身高- 180.0±7.9 cm,体重- 79.6±12.3 kg;281名女性,年龄21.5±2.1岁,身高- 166.4±6.0 cm,体重- 59.6±8.9 kg。在体育课上,学生被要求用正常、超重和体重不足三种类型来评估自己的体重值。用BMI模型评价体重值。使用Pearson类间相关系数确定这两个评价结果之间的相关性。结果。单因素方差分析显示,三个研究组的BMI值差异相对较小(p=0.235)。组内差异处于中等区间:从护理组的V=11.4%到体育组的V= 16.6%。对于所有参与者,皮尔逊类间相关(Pearson interclass correlation)显示客观BMI值与主观评价结果之间存在中度显著相关(r=0.354, p<0.001)。结论。将体重指数客观评价结果和主观评价结果与学生心理评价结果进行比较。主观评价结果非常符合BMI值所得结果。相应的误差显得微不足道。关于一个共同的一般人口的统计假设,这两个样本被接受。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Physical Education of Students
Physical Education of Students EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
University students’ physical features- reasons, consequences, solutions Remote versus onsite proctored exams: comparing students’ results in physical fitness testing Acute effects of repeated isoinertial lunges on jump and sprint parameters Sensory integration research: priority scientific directions based on the analysis of Web of Science Core Collection resources 3D kinematic analysis of salto backward in acrobatic rock and roll: a case study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1