Impact of Gender Sensitivity on Anthropometric Measurements

Errors can easily be introduced into anthropometry measurements. The measurer’s confidence may not be equal between same-sex and opposite-sex measuring, hence the need to evaluate and compare errors arising from anthropometric measurement when participants are measured by a practitioner of the same gender and vice versa. A sample of 100 students of Ebonyi State University (60 males and 40 females, aged between 18 and 45 years) was used for this study. From this number were extracted 17 different parameters by a trained male anthropometrist. A separate sub-sample of 59 adults (20 males and 39 females) was measured for skinfold thickness at eight sites by a trained female anthropometrist. Comparison of two sets of measurements extracted by a male indicated that first set measured did not differ significantly from the second set apart from the neck girth measurements. However, when a male anthropometrist extracted measurements on females, nine parameters’ measurements significantly differed (P<0.05) when the first measurement of each was compared with the second measurements. In comparison using Technical Error of Measurement (TEM) and Relative Technical Error of Measurement (RTEM), the measurements on males extracted by a male had lower error when compared with the measurements on females extracted by a male. When a female measured male, there were significant differences (P<0.05) in most of the parameters considered. However, the measurements extracted from females by a female did not indicate significant difference in all the measurements extracted from different sites apart from measurement extracted from the abdominal site. TEM and RTEM analysis indicated lower error on the two different skinfold thickness extracted from females by a female when compared with magnitude of errors that arose from two different measurements extracted from males by a female. Gender sensitivity is another challenge to reproducibility and accuracy of data in anthropometry.

Key Words: gender sensitivity, anthropometric measurements, accuracy, reproducibility, TEM, RTEM