Instead of just saying ‘obese’ or ‘not obese,’ the study looked at how even small increases in belly fat measures were linked to higher depression risk — giving a more detailed picture.
Scientific Claim
The use of continuous variables for all obesity indices, rather than clinical cutoffs, allows for a more nuanced understanding of the dose-response relationship between abdominal adiposity and psychiatric morbidity in this population.
Original Statement
“All ten indices were analyzed as continuous variables rather than categorized using clinical cutoffs. This approach is consistent with prior epidemiological studies examining anthropometric indices and mental health and avoids imposing arbitrary thresholds that may not be clinically validated.”
Evidence Quality Assessment
Claim Status
appropriately stated
Study Design Support
Design supports claim
Appropriate Language Strength
association
Can only show association/correlation
Assessment Explanation
The study justifies this methodological choice and the claim accurately describes the analytical approach without implying causal or clinical implications.
Evidence from Studies
Supporting (1)
Abdominal Obesity Indices as Predictors of Psychiatric Morbidity in a Large-Scale Taiwanese Cohort
The study found that the more belly fat a person has—measured by precise numbers rather than just 'obese' or 'not obese'—the higher their risk of depression or anxiety, showing that even small changes in fat levels matter.