ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Nutr.
Sec. Clinical Nutrition
Volume 12 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fnut.2025.1610214
Association of Obesity-Related Anthropometric Indicators with Chronic Constipation and Diarrhea among U.S. Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study
Provisionally accepted
- Department of Gastroenterology, Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi’an, China
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Aim Prior studies have linked obesity indicators to constipation/diarrhea, but multi-measure comparisons remain limited. We analyzed these associations in U.S. adults.This cross-sectional study utilized data from three cycles (2005)(2006)(2007)(2008)(2009)(2010) of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). The final analysis included 13,105 participants after excluding those aged <20 years or with missing data for any study variables. Bowel habits were categorized using the Bristol Stool Form Scale (BSFS). Multiple analytical approaches were employed: descriptive statistics, weighted multivariable logistic regression, weighted restricted cubic spline (RCS) analysis, subgroup analyses, and sensitivity analysis. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of various anthropometric indices-waist circumference (WC), body mass index (BMI), relative fat mass (RFM), body roundness index (BRI), weight-adjusted waist index (WWI), waist-toheight ratio (WHtR), and a body shape index (ABSI) -for chronic diarrhea and constipation using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis and the area under the curve (AUC).Weighted multivariable logistic regression revealed significant positive associations between seven obesity indicators and diarrhea (all P<0.05), with the highest odds ratios (ORs) observed in the top quartiles for WWI (OR=1.937, 95% CI=1.516-2.474, P<0.001) and RFM (OR=1.870, 95% CI=1.254-2.790, P=0.003). Meanwhile, RFM, BRI, WC, BMI, and WHtR showed significant inverse associations with constipation (P<0.05), with the lowest ORs observed for the top quartiles of BMI (OR=0.530, 95% CI=0.408-0.689, P<0.001) and RFM (OR=0.599, 95% CI=0.409-0.879, P=0.011).By contrast, the top ABSI quartile exhibited a positive association with constipation (OR = 1.262, 95% CI=1.014, 1.571, P=0.038). ROC analysis indicated RFM as the most discriminative indicator for constipation (AUC = 0.577) and WWI for diarrhea (AUC = 0.614), respectively, among tested indices. RCS analysis demonstrated an inverse J-shaped relationship between RFM and constipation and a linear positive association between WWI and diarrhea. Subgroup analyses further validated the robust associations of RFM and WWI with intestinal disorders across strata of age, sex, race, smoking, drinking, sleep disturbances, diabetes, and depression. Sensitivity analyses yielded consistent results, supporting the stability of these findings.The seven indicators are useful indicators for assessing intestinal disorders in U.S. adults, with RFM and WWI demonstrating the highest discriminative ability for constipation and diarrhea, respectively.
Keywords: Obesity, Anthropometric indicators, Constipation, Diarrhea, NHANES
Received: 11 Apr 2025; Accepted: 25 Jul 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Ning, Hu, Li, Zhuang and Dai. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Fei Dai, Department of Gastroenterology, Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi’an, China
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.