ANTHROPOMETRIC MEASUREMENTS AS INDICATORS OF HEALTH RISKS AMONG MALE AND FEMALE UNIVERSITY STUDENTS

SCIENCE AND INNOVATION INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL VOLUME 4 ISSUE 11 NOVEMBER 2025 ISSN: 2181-3337 | SCIENTISTS.UZ 4 ANTHROPOMETRIC MEASUREMENTS AS INDICATORS OF HEALTH RISKS AMONG MALE AND FEMALE UNIVERSITY STUDENTS S.Sh. Sharipova Master’s student in Biology, Karshi State University https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17574424 Abstract. The research study examined the relationships among various anthropometric measurements of male and female university students. The research was conducted on a total of 176 students aged between 17 and 29 years, in the city of Karshi, Kashkadarya region. Data were collected by self-administered questionnaire and direct anthropometric measurements.The measurements included age, height, weight, body mass index (BMI), chest circumference, waist circumference (WC), hip circumference, waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), and waist-to-height ratio (WHtR). The results revealed notable differences between male and female participants. Male students demonstrated higher mean values of height, weight, waist, and chest circumference, while female students showed higher mean hip circumference. The overall mean BMI of the participants was within the normal range (21.42 ± 3.35 kg/m²), indicating that the majority of students had a healthy body weight. However, some individuals exhibited elevated waist-to-hip ratio and waistto-height ratio values, suggesting a tendency toward central fat accumulation, which is associated with increased metabolic and cardiovascular risk. In conclusion, anthropometric indicators such as body mass index, waist circumference, waist-to-hip ratio and waist-to-height ratio provide valuable insights into the health status of university students. Monitoring these parameters is essential for early identification of potential obesity-related health risks and for promoting healthy lifestyle habits among young adults. Keywords: anthropometric measurements, body mass index, waist circumference, waistto-hip ratio, waist-to-height ratio, university students, health risk, body composition. INTRODUCTION In recent years, obesity has become one of the most serious global public health issues, with its prevalence rising rapidly, particularly among young adults. University students are considered a population at particular risk due to lifestyle changes associated with the onset of academic life, including irregular eating habits, reduced physical activity, and increased psychological stress. These behaviors and environmental factors often contribute to excessive weight gain and fat accumulation during early adulthood (World Health Organization, 2020). According to the World Health Organization (WHO) classification, Body Mass Index (BMI) is used as a standard indicator for defining weight categories: underweight (<18.5 kg/m²), normal weight (18.5–24.9 kg/m²), overweight (25.0–29.9 kg/m²), and obesity (≥30.0 kg/m²) (WHO, 2021). Although BMI remains one of the most widely used tools, it does not accurately reflect body fat distribution or differentiate between lean and fat mass. Therefore, additional indices such as Waist-to-Hip Ratio (WHR) and Waist-to-Height Ratio (WHtR) are increasingly recommended to assess central obesity and its associated metabolic risks. Recent studies have indicated that abdominal or visceral fat accumulation plays a more critical role in the development of chronic conditions such as cardiovascular diseases, insulin SCIENCE AND INNOVATION INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL VOLUME 4 ISSUE 11 NOVEMBER 2025 ISSN: 2181-3337 | SCIENTISTS.UZ 5 resistance, and type 2 diabetes compared to overall body weight (Ashwell & Gibson, 2016; Alberti et al., 2019). WHR and WHtR are considered more precise indicators of body fat distribution and are better predictors of cardiometabolic risk than BMI alone. Specifically, a waist-to-hip ratio above 0.90 for men and 0.85 for women, and a waist-to-height ratio exceeding 0.50, are regarded as thresholds for increased health risk. (Emdin CA, Khera AV, Natarajan P, et al. 2017). As of 2024, the Lancet Commission on Obesity and the European Association for the Study of Obesity recommended that obesity should no longer be diagnosed with BMI alone due to its several limitations, but should be confirmed by other surrogate measures, such as a waist-to-height ratio greater than 0.5.( Busetto L, September 2024). Recent research has emphasized the importance of Waist-to-Hip Ratio (WHR) as a key indicator of cardiometabolic health, as elevated WHR levels are closely linked to increased risks of cardiovascular diseases and metabolic disorders. Similarly, Waist-to-Height Ratio (WHtR) has gained recognition as a more sensitive marker of central adiposity and related health risks compared to BMI or WHR alone. Therefore, incorporating both WHR and WHtR, alongside BMI, provides a more comprehensive evaluation of health status, particularly in assessing the risk of central obesity (V. Vijaya Lakshmi and E. Shirin Hima Bindu, 2023). According to S. Sh. Sharipova (2025), the results of the conducted study revealed that WHR (31%) and WHtR (22%) analyses indicated the presence of central obesity and cardiometabolic risk among female students, while among male students, these indicators accounted for 21.74% and 47.83%, respectively. The present study aims to analyze and compare anthropometric indicators, including BMI, WC, WHR, and WHtR, among university students. By assessing the relationships between these parameters, the study seeks to identify early predictors of obesity-related health risks and provide evidence-based recommendations for promoting a healthy lifestyle among young adults. MATERIALS AND METHODS Study Design and Participants This cross-sectional study was conducted during the autumn of 2025 among university students in Karshi city, Kashkadarya region, Uzbekistan. A total of 176 students (42 males and 134 females) aged between 17 and 29 years voluntarily participated in the research from Karshi State University and the University of Economics and Pedagogy. Participants were selected randomly from various faculties. All individuals were apparently healthy and free from chronic diseases or physical disabilities that could affect body measurements. Ethical Considerations Prior to data collection, the purpose and procedures of the study were clearly explained to all participants. Each participant provided written informed consent before participation. The study was conducted in accordance with the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki (revised 2013). Confidentiality of all participants’ personal data was strictly maintained throughout the study. Data Collection Data were collected using two approaches: Self-administered questionnaire — to obtain personal information such as age, sex, and lifestyle habits. Direct anthropometric measurements — performed according to standard physiological and anthropometric methods. Anthropometric Measurements SCIENCE AND INNOVATION INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL VOLUME 4 ISSUE 11 NOVEMBER 2025 ISSN: 2181-3337 | SCIENTISTS.UZ 6 Height (cm) and weight (kg) were measured using a stadiometer and calibrated digital scale with participants wearing light clothing and no shoes. Chest, waist, and hip circumferences (cm) were measured using a flexible, non-elastic measuring tape. Chest circumference was taken at the level of the nipples during normal respiration. Waist circumference (WC) was measured midway between the lowest rib and the iliac crest. Hip circumference was measured at the widest part of the buttocks. Body Mass Index (BMI) was calculated using the standard formula. Classification Criteria According to the World Health Organization (WHO, 2000) classification, BMI values were categorized as follows:  Underweight: <18.5 kg/m²  Normal weight: 18.5–24.9 kg/m²  Overweight: 25.0–29.9 kg/m²  Obese: ≥30.0 kg/m² Waist-to-height ratio values greater than 0.5 and waist-to-hip ratio values above 0.90 for men and 0.85 for women were considered indicators of central obesity. Statistical Analysis All data were processed using Microsoft Excel and SPSS software (version 25.0). Descriptive statistics (mean ± standard deviation) were calculated for each parameter. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Table 1 presents the descriptive statistics of the main anthropometric variables measured in the study, including age, height, weight, body mass index (BMI), chest, waist, and hip circumferences, as well as waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) and waist-to-height ratio (WHtR). The participants were between 17 and 29 years old, with a mean age of 19.9 years, indicating a relatively uniform age range across the sample. Their heights ranged from 149 cm to 192 cm, with an average of 164.9 cm, while body weight varied from 39 kg to 97 kg, resulting in a mean of 58.3 kg. The BMI values spanned from 16.2 to 33.6, with a mean of 21.42, suggesting that most participants fell within the normal weight range. Waist circumference values ranged from 60 cm to 114 cm, averaging 77.3 cm with a standard deviation of 8.43 cm. Similarly, hip circumference measurements varied between 82 cm and 119 cm, with a mean of 95 cm and a standard deviation of 6.55 cm. The waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) ranged from 0.684 to 0.982, with an average of 0.809 and a standard deviation of 0.055, reflecting moderate variability in body fat distribution among students. Table 1. Variables of all students Variables Min Max Mean St.Dev Age (years) 17 29 19.9 1.96 Height (cm) 149 192 164.9 8.20 Weight (kg) 39 97 58.3 10.49 Body Mass Index (BMI kg/m2) 16.2 33.6 21.42 3.35 Chest circumference (cm) 79 125 89.71 6.87 Waist circumference (cm) 60 114 77.3 8.43 Hip circumference (cm) 82 119 95 6.55 Waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) 0.684 0.982 0.809 0.055 SCIENCE AND INNOVATION INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL VOLUME 4 ISSUE 11 NOVEMBER 2025 ISSN: 2181-3337 | SCIENTISTS.UZ 7 Waist-to-height ratio (WHtR) 0.357 0.670 0.469 0.051 Table 2 presents the descriptive statistics of anthropometric indicators among female (n=134) and male (n=42) university students. The mean age of both groups was nearly identical, averaging 19.9 years. Males were generally taller and heavier than females, with an average height of 175.5 ± 6.12 cm and weight of 65.6 ± 10.3 kg, compared to 161.6 ± 5.55 cm and 56.1 ± 9.49 kg for females, respectively. The mean Body Mass Index (BMI) values were similar between females (21.46 ± 3.42 kg/m²) and males (21.3 ± 3.15 kg/m²), indicating that, on average, both groups fell within the normal weight category according to WHO standards. However, the wide range of BMI values (from 16.2 to 33.6 in females and 16.4 to 30.7 in males) suggests the presence of both underweight and overweight individuals within the sample. Regarding circumferential measurements, males demonstrated slightly higher chest (90.5 ± 6.19 cm) and waist (80.6 ± 8.20 cm) circumferences than females (89.4 ± 7.07 cm and 76.3 ± 8.25 cm, respectively). Hip circumference values were nearly identical between sexes, averaging around 95 cm. In the comparative analysis of central obesity indicators, the mean Waist-to-Hip Ratio (WHR) was found to be 0.799 ± 0.053 among female students and 0.843 ± 0.052 among male students. The average Waist-to-Height Ratio (WHtR) was calculated as 0.472 ± 0.052 for females and 0.459 ± 0.048 for males. Based on established risk thresholds (WHR ≥ 0.85 for females and ≥ 0.90 for males; WHtR ≥ 0.5 for both sexes), 17.16% of female students and 14.29% of male students were identified as being at risk of central obesity according to WHR. However, WHtR analysis revealed a higher proportion of risk among females (31.35%) compared to males (14.29%). These findings indicate that although male students demonstrated slightly higher average WHR values, female students were more likely to exhibit elevated WHtR, suggesting a greater relative accumulation of abdominal adiposity. This discrepancy emphasizes the necessity of using multiple anthropometric markers, as reliance on BMI alone may lead to underestimation of cardiometabolic risk in young adults. Table 2. Descriptive statistics of anthropometric indicators among female and male university students Variables Female (n=134) Male (n=42) Mean ± SD Min Max Mean ± SD Min Max Age (years) 19.9 ± 1.87 17 28 19.9 ± 2.26 17 29 Height (cm) 161.6 ± 5.55 149 176 175.5 ± 6.12 161 192 Weight (kg) 56.1 ± 9.49 39 97 65.6 ± 10.3 49 94 Body Mass Index (BMI kg/m²) 21.46 ± 3.42 16,2 33,6 21.3 ± 3.15 16,4 30,7 Chest circumference (cm) 89.4 ± 7.07 79 125 90.5 ± 6.19 80 112 Waist circumference (cm) 76.3 ± 8.25 60 114 80.6 ± 8.20 64 112 Hip circumference (cm) 95.4 ± 6.70 82 119 95.6 ± 6.10 84 114 Waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) 0.799 ± 0.053 0.684 0.957 0.843 ±0.052 0.70 3 0.982 Waist-to-height ratio (WHtR) 0.472 ± 0.052 0.365 0.670 0.459 ± 0.048 0.35 7 0.64 SCIENCE AND INNOVATION INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL VOLUME 4 ISSUE 11 NOVEMBER 2025 ISSN: 2181-3337 | SCIENTISTS.UZ 8 The distribution of Body Mass Index (BMI) categories among the study participants is presented in Table 3 and illustrated in Figure 1. The majority of students (68.18%, n = 120) fell within the normal weight range (18.5–24.9 kg/m²). A smaller proportion of participants were underweight (BMI < 18.5 kg/m², 18.75%, n = 33), while 9.09% (n = 16) were classified as overweight (BMI 25.0–29.9 kg/m²). Only a few students (3.98%, n = 7) were identified as having class 1 obesity (BMI 30.0–34.9 kg/m²). These results indicate that the majority of university students maintained a normal weight status, though a notable fraction exhibited either underweight or overweight/obese conditions. The bar chart (Figure 1) visually highlights the predominance of students within the normal BMI range, while also illustrating the smaller, yet clinically relevant, proportions of students at risk of weight-related health issues. Table 3. The distribution of BMI categories Category Body Mass Index (BMI) Number (N) of respondents (%) Underweight Below 18.5 33 (18,75%) Normal weight 18.5-24.9 120 (68,18%) Overweight 25.0-29.9 16 (9,09%) Obesity class 1 30.0-34.9 7 (3,98%) Figure 1. Distribution of Body Mass Index (BMI) categories among the study participants The distribution of university students according to Waist-to-Hip Ratio (WHR) and Waistto-Height Ratio (WHtR) thresholds, which indicate central obesity and cardiometabolic risk, is presented in Table 4. Among female students (n = 134), the majority (82.84%, n = 111) had WHR values below the risk threshold of 0.85, indicating normal central fat distribution, while 17.16% (n = 23) exceeded this threshold, suggesting elevated risk of central obesity. For WHtR, 68.65% of female students (n = 92) were below the 0.50 cut-off, whereas 31.35% (n = 42) were above the threshold, indicating potential cardiometabolic risk. Among male students (n = 42), 85.71% (n = 36) had WHR values below the risk threshold of 0.90, while 14.29% (n = 6) exceeded this threshold. Similarly, for WHtR, 85.71% of males (n = 36) were below 0.50, and 14.29% (n = 6) were above the cut-off. These findings suggest that although the majority of both female and male students fall within normal WHR and WHtR ranges, a notable proportion of females (especially according to WHtR) are at increased risk of central obesity and related cardiometabolic complications. The data highlight the importance of using multiple anthropometric indicators to assess obesity risk among university students. 68,18% 3,98% 9,09% 18,75% Normal weight Obesity class 1 Overweight Underweight BMI status among all students SCIENCE AND INNOVATION INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL VOLUME 4 ISSUE 11 NOVEMBER 2025 ISSN: 2181-3337 | SCIENTISTS.UZ 9 Table 4. Classification of female and male respondents based on WHR and WHtR Indicators Waist to hip Ratio Waist to Height Ratio Female Health Risk WHR Threshold Number (N) of respondents (%) WHtR Threshold Number (N) of respondents (%) Norma l <0.85 111 (82.84%) <0.5 92 (68.65%) Risk ≥0.85 23 (17.16%) ≥0.5 42 (31.35%) Male Health Risk WHR Threshold Number (N) of respondents (%) WHtR Threshold Number (N) of respondents (%) Norma l <0.90 36 (85.71%) <0.5 36 (85.71%) Risk ≥0.90 6 (14.29%) ≥0.5 6 (14.29%) CONCLUSION This study evaluated key anthropometric indicators among university students and revealed notable patterns in overall and central adiposity. Although most participants fell within the normal BMI range, the presence of underweight, overweight, and obesity cases indicates variability in nutritional status among young adults. Importantly, reliance on BMI alone would not fully capture adiposity-related health risks, as central obesity indicators provided additional insight into sexspecific fat distribution patterns. Analysis of WHR and WHtR demonstrated that 17.16% of female students and 14.29% of male students were at risk of central obesity according to WHR criteria. However, WHtR results indicated a higher prevalence of central adiposity among female students (31.35%) compared to males (14.29%), suggesting that abdominal fat accumulation was more pronounced in females, despite similar mean BMI values across groups. These findings highlight the significance of incorporating WHR and WHtR assessments alongside BMI to obtain a more accurate evaluation of cardiometabolic risk. Given that university students are in a critical stage of behavioral and lifestyle formation, early identification of central obesity is essential. Preventive strategies such as structured physical activity programs, dietary counseling, and health education initiatives should be implemented to support healthy weight maintenance and reduce the long-term burden of non-communicable diseases. Overall, this study reaffirms the need for multi-dimensional anthropometric monitoring in youth populations to ensure timely intervention and promote lifelong health. REFERENCES 1. World Health Organization. (2020). BMI classification. WHO. 2. Ashwell, M., & Gibson, S. (2016). Waist-to-height ratio as an indicator of early health risk: Simpler and more predictive than using a ‘matrix’ based on BMI and waist circumference. BMJ Open, 6(3), e010159. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010159 3. Emdin, C. A., Khera, A. V., Natarajan, P., et al. (2017). Genetic association of waist-to-hip ratio with cardiometabolic traits, type 2 diabetes, and coronary heart disease. JAMA, 317(6), 626–634. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.21042 SCIENCE AND INNOVATION INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL VOLUME 4 ISSUE 11 NOVEMBER 2025 ISSN: 2181-3337 | SCIENTISTS.UZ 10 4. Busetto L (September 2024). "A new framework for the diagnosis, staging and management of obesity in adults". Nature Medicine. 30 (9): 2395–2399. doi:10.1038/s41591-024-030953. 5. Sharipova, S. Sh. (2025). Qarshi shahri oliy o‘quv yurti talabalarining ayrim antropometrik ko‘rsatkichlarini o‘rganish va ularning tahlili.Qo'qon DPI. Ilmiy Xabarlar Jurnali, 5(7-A), 300–307. https://ilmiyxabarlar.kspi.uz/index.php/journal/article/view/4988 6. V. Vijaya Lakshmi and E. Shirin Hima Bindu.(2023) Anthropometric Measures as Indicators of Health Risks among Female College Students // Agriculture Association of Textile Chemical and Critical Reviews Journal (2023) 261-264. https://doi.org/10.58321/AATCCReview.2023.11.03.261 7. Bocharin I.V, Guryanov M.S (2023). Oсобенности антропометрических показателей студентов младших курсов // Карельский научный журнал. 2023. Т. 12. № 2(43). 8. Mervat M. Arrab, Nanees A. Ismail, Meshiel Alalyani (2017) Anthropometric profile, physical activity and Dietary habits among female university students. Journal of Nursing and Health Science pp43-49. 10.9790/1959-0605034349