Definition and research guide
This page combines a MeSH definition, publication statistics and selected research abstracts. It is a starting point for reading the literature, not a medical textbook or a systematic evidence review.
Content available: 3 complete abstracts (763 words), 9 references. Full article text is not stored or reproduced here; follow the PMID, DOI or PMC links to read the original sources and their access terms.
Definition
An indicator of body density as determined by the relationship of body weight to body height. BMI=weight (kg)/height squared (m2). BMI correlates with body fat (adipose tissue). Their relationship varies with age and gender. For adults, BMI falls into these categories: below 18.5 (underweight); 18.5-24.9 (normal); 25.0-29.9 (overweight); 30.0 and above (obese). (National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)
Definition: NLM Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) scope note (Public domain (U.S. National Library of Medicine); attribution requested). View the MeSH record.
Also known as: Index, Body Mass; Quetelet's Index; Quetelets Index; Quetelet Index; Index, Quetelet.
Where it fits in the MeSH classification
- Broader topics
- Body Weights and Measures; Anthropometry
Related concepts
Research landscape
PubMed indexes 171,023 records tagged with the MeSH heading “Body Mass Index” (counts retrieved 2026-10-31). 43,920 of them (25.7%) were published from 2020 onward, and the busiest period so far is 2010-2019 with 78,821 records.
Reviews account for 8,917 records (5.2%) and meta-analyses for 3,277. Randomized controlled trials number 11,352 (6.6%) as a share of all records on the topic.
Show the data
| Period | Records |
|---|---|
| through 1999 | 7,656 |
| 2000-2009 | 40,626 |
| 2010-2019 | 78,821 |
| 2020 onward | 43,920 |
Publication-type chart data
| Type | Records | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Reviews | 8,917 | 5.2% |
| Meta-analyses | 3,277 | 1.9% |
| Randomized controlled trials | 11,352 | 6.6% |
Method: PubMed query "Body Mass Index"[MeSH Terms] with publication-type and date filters, retrieved 2026-10-31.
Reading the evidence in anatomy and physiology
Anatomy describes how body structures are built and physiology describes how they normally work, so most findings here are descriptive or mechanistic rather than evidence about treatment. Much of what is known comes from dissection, imaging, tissue studies and experiments in animals, and measurements in healthy volunteers can differ from those in people with disease or at different ages. Normal ranges vary between individuals and populations. Check whether a result was measured in people or in another species, the age and health of the participants, and the method used.
Evidence from open-access studies
These open-access studies come from PubMed’s best-match results for this heading (papers whose main topic it is), ranked here by citation count, with one recent addition. Each abstract is reproduced in full under its recorded open licence so that you can read the authors’ own words. They illustrate the literature; they are not a systematic summary of it. Citation counts measure attention, not reliability or clinical benefit.
| Study / authors | Year | Source label / design | Europe PMC citations | Licence / source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Body Mass Index, Clinical Outcomes, and Mortality in Heart Failure: A Mendelian Randomization Study | 2026 | Research article Design not recorded in structured metadata | 2 | cc by PMID 42017882 · DOI · PMC13211948 |
| Low Body Mass Index Increases Frailty Risk in Old-Old Adults: Findings From a 3-Year Longitudinal Study | 2026 | Research article Design not recorded in structured metadata | 2 | cc by PMID 41932860 · DOI · PMC13048879 |
| The Linear Association Between A Body Shape Index and Abdominal Aortic Calcification in Individuals With Hypertension | 2026 | Research article Design not recorded in structured metadata | 2 | cc by PMID 42206551 · DOI · PMC13239843 |
Body Mass Index, Clinical Outcomes, and Mortality in Heart Failure: A Mendelian Randomization Study [1]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- BackgroundExcess adiposity, most commonly indexed through body mass index (BMI), is strongly associated with the development of heart failure (HF).
- Closing excerpt
- ConclusionsAmong patients with HF, higher BMI was associated with increased all-cause mortality and cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization, supporting the potential role of weight-management strategies across the ejection fraction spectrum.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (338 words)
BackgroundExcess adiposity, most commonly indexed through body mass index (BMI), is strongly associated with the development of heart failure (HF). Weight loss therapies improve outcomes in patients with obesity and HF with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), but their effects in HF with reduced LVEF remain unclear.ObjectivesThe aim of this work is to determine whether higher BMI is associated with adverse clinical outcomes in patients with HF and whether there is effect modification by LVEF subgroup.MethodsTwo-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) was used, with genome-wide significant loci associated with BMI as instrumental variables and outcome data from a genome-wide association study (GWAS) of time-to-event clinical outcomes in patients with HF. A total of 50,636 individuals of European ancestry with established HF from 22 cohorts were included in the genetic analysis: 12 HF trials, 1 prospective case-cohort study, 9 cohorts nested within non-HF cardiovascular trials, and 1 population-based cohort derived from the UK Biobank. The exposure was genetically predicted BMI and the outcome measures were all-cause mortality and a composite of cardiovascular mortality or HF hospitalization. Genetic associations for the outcomes were derived from our GWAS and MR was used to estimate the unbiased association of genetically predicted BMI with these clinical outcomes.ResultsThe mean BMI was 29.2 ± 5.8 kg/m2. Over a median follow-up of 27.0 months, all-cause mortality occurred in 11,454 patients (23%), and 11,360 participants (22%) experienced the composite endpoint. Genetically predicted BMI was associated with an increased rate of both all-cause mortality (HR per SD [4.8 BMI units] 1.21; 95% CI: 1.13-1.29; P = 9 × 10-8) and the composite outcome (HR 1.29; 95% CI: 1.20-1.38; P = 8 × 10-13). Associations were consistent across LVEF ≤40% and >40%: for all-cause mortality, HR: 1.16 (95% CI: 0.99-1.37) and 1.20 (95% CI: 0.94-1.53); and for the composite outcome, HR: 1.30 (95% CI: 1.15-1.48) and 1.57 (95% CI: 1.29-1.91), respectively.ConclusionsAmong patients with HF, higher BMI was associated with increased all-cause mortality and cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization, supporting the potential role of weight-management strategies across the ejection fraction spectrum.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 42017882 · DOI · PMC13211948
Low Body Mass Index Increases Frailty Risk in Old-Old Adults: Findings From a 3-Year Longitudinal Study [2]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- ObjectivesFrailty risk increases with age.
- Closing excerpt
- 5 kg/m2 experienced a more pronounced increase in frailty risk over the 3-year follow-up period.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (230 words)
ObjectivesFrailty risk increases with age. It is important to understand how body mass index (BMI) relates to changes in frailty risk among adults aged 75 years and older (old-old adults). We examined the longitudinal association between baseline BMI and changes in frailty risk over 3 years.MethodsThis 3-year retrospective cohort study included 515 old-old adults (median age 79.3 years; 45.0% male) who participated in the Latter-Stage Older Persons Health Checkup in Amami City, Japan. Participants were categorized into three BMI groups: 2. Frailty risk was assessed using the Old-Old Questionnaire for Medical Checkups, a validated tool for assessing multidimensional frailty. Thirteen items were analyzed, excluding smoking and social support domains, to better examine the association between BMI and frailty risk. Higher scores indicate a greater frailty risk. We used linear mixed-effects models to analyze the associations between BMI categories at baseline and changes in frailty risk.ResultsThe BMI 2 group participants reported a greater annual increase in frailty risk compared with those in the BMI 21.5-24.9 kg/m2 group (β = 0.17, Standard error = 0.07, p = 0.014). The BMI ≥ 25.0 kg/m2 group participants reported no significant change in frailty risk compared with those in the BMI 21.5-24.9 kg/m2 group (β = -0.01, Standard error = 0.06, p = 0.821).ConclusionOld-old adults with a BMI of ≤ 21.5 kg/m2 experienced a more pronounced increase in frailty risk over the 3-year follow-up period.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 41932860 · DOI · PMC13048879
The Linear Association Between A Body Shape Index and Abdominal Aortic Calcification in Individuals With Hypertension [3]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the association between A Body Shape Index (ABSI) and abdominal aortic calcification (AAC) in individuals with hypertension.
- Closing excerpt
- ConclusionHigher ABSI levels show a significant, independent association with increased AAC risk in hypertensive patients, suggesting potential clinical value as a indicator for early vascular calcification detection in this population.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (195 words)
ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the association between A Body Shape Index (ABSI) and abdominal aortic calcification (AAC) in individuals with hypertension.MethodsThis cross-sectional analysis utilized data from 1486 participants in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). The relationship between ABSI and AAC was evaluated through logistic regression, subgroup analyses, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve assessment, and restricted cubic spline (RCS) modeling.ResultsMultivariable logistic regression revealed that each standard deviation increase in ABSI corresponded to a 16.2% elevated AAC risk (OR = 1.162, 95% CI: 1.025-1.318, p = 0.019). Compared with the lowest quartile (Q1), individuals in Q3 and Q4 had significantly higher risks of AAC, with ORs of 1.554 (95% CI: 1.096-2.204, p = 0.013) and 1.503 (95% CI: 1.047-2.157, p = 0.027), respectively. Subgroup analyses revealed a robust association between ABSI and AAC that was consistently observed across strata. ROC curve analysis revealed that ABSI provided moderate discriminative ability for AAC detection in the overall cohort (AUC = 0.625, 95% CI: 0.596-0.654, p 0.05).ConclusionHigher ABSI levels show a significant, independent association with increased AAC risk in hypertensive patients, suggesting potential clinical value as a indicator for early vascular calcification detection in this population.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 42206551 · DOI · PMC13239843
Key reviews and meta-analyses
The most cited review-type papers among PubMed’s best-match results for this heading, listed with bibliographic details only. Follow the links for the full text and access terms.
- Research article Meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies for height and body mass index in ∼700000 individuals of European ancestry [4]
- Research article Body-mass index and all-cause mortality: individual-participant-data meta-analysis of 239 prospective studies in four continents [5]
- Research article Impact of maternal body mass index and gestational weight gain on pregnancy complications: an individual participant data meta-analysis of European, North American and Australian cohorts [6]
- Research article Association of Gestational Weight Gain With Adverse Maternal and Infant Outcomes [7]
- Research article Maternal body mass index, gestational weight gain, and the risk of overweight and obesity across childhood: An individual participant data meta-analysis [8]
- Research article Diet, physical activity and behavioural interventions for the treatment of overweight or obese children from the age of 6 to 11 years [9]
References
- Sunderland N, Asselin G, Henry A, Nelson CP, Lemieux Perreault LP, Asselbergs FW, et al.. Body Mass Index, Clinical Outcomes, and Mortality in Heart Failure: A Mendelian Randomization Study. . 2026. PMID 42017882 · DOI · PMC13211948
- Tabira K, Shiratsuchi D, Miyake Y, Makizako H. Low Body Mass Index Increases Frailty Risk in Old-Old Adults: Findings From a 3-Year Longitudinal Study. . 2026. PMID 41932860 · DOI · PMC13048879
- Qiu X, Wang Z. The Linear Association Between A Body Shape Index and Abdominal Aortic Calcification in Individuals With Hypertension. . 2026. PMID 42206551 · DOI · PMC13239843
- Yengo L, Sidorenko J, Kemper KE, Zheng Z, Wood AR, Weedon MN, et al.. Meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies for height and body mass index in ∼700000 individuals of European ancestry. Hum Mol Genet. 2018. PMID 30124842 · DOI · PMC6488973
- Global BMI Mortality Collaboration, Di Angelantonio E, Bhupathiraju ShN, Wormser D, Gao P, Kaptoge S, et al.. Body-mass index and all-cause mortality: individual-participant-data meta-analysis of 239 prospective studies in four continents. Lancet. 2016. PMID 27423262 · DOI · PMC4995441
- Santos S, Voerman E, Amiano P, Barros H, Beilin LJ, Bergström A, et al.. Impact of maternal body mass index and gestational weight gain on pregnancy complications: an individual participant data meta-analysis of European, North American and Australian cohorts. BJOG. 2019. PMID 30786138 · DOI · PMC6554069
- LifeCycle Project-Maternal Obesity and Childhood Outcomes Study Group, Voerman E, Santos S, Inskip H, Amiano P, Barros H, et al.. Association of Gestational Weight Gain With Adverse Maternal and Infant Outcomes. JAMA. 2019. PMID 31063572 · DOI · PMC6506886
- Voerman E, Santos S, Patro Golab B, Amiano P, Ballester F, Barros H, et al.. Maternal body mass index, gestational weight gain, and the risk of overweight and obesity across childhood: An individual participant data meta-analysis. PLoS Med. 2019. PMID 30742624 · DOI · PMC6370184
- Mead E, Brown T, Rees K, Azevedo LB, Whittaker V, Jones D, et al.. Diet, physical activity and behavioural interventions for the treatment of overweight or obese children from the age of 6 to 11 years. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017. PMID 28639319 · DOI · PMC6481885
About this article
- Sources
- NLM Medical Subject Headings (definition, synonyms); NCBI PubMed (counts, identifiers); Europe PMC (open-access abstracts and citation counts).
- Verification
- Every reference was resolved against PubMed on 2026-10-31; title, year and DOI matched.
- Review state
- automated source verified; no human expert review has been recorded yet.
- Version
- 1, last updated 2026-10-31.
See how EvidenceLib is built. Spotted an error? Email support@evidencehelix.com.
Evidence strength
EvidenceHelix's computed view of the study designs behind this topic: how common meta-analyses, randomized trials and reviews are, how recent the literature is, and a plain-language reading. It describes the design mix of the literature. It is not a quality appraisal of any study, and it is not medical advice.