Cited by 291Body Composition Measurement TechniquesNutrition and Health in AgingElectrical and Bioimpedance Tomography

Measurement of lean body mass using bioelectrical impedance analysis: a consideration of the pros and cons.

Sergi, Giuseppe, De Rui, Marina, Stubbs, Brendon, Veronese, Nicola, Manzato, Enzo·2017·Aging Clinical and Experimental Research

Abstract

The assessment of body composition has important applications in the evaluation of nutritional status and estimating potential health risks. Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) is a valid method for the assessment of body composition. BIA is an alternative to more invasive and expensive methods like dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, computerized tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging. Bioelectrical impedance analysis is an easy-to-use and low-cost method for the estimation of fat-free mass (FFM) in physiological and pathological conditions. The reliability of BIA measurements is influenced by various factors related to the instrument itself, including electrodes, operator, subject, and environment. BIA assumptions beyond its use for body composition are the human body is empirically composed of cylinders, FFM contains virtually all the water and conducting electrolytes in the body, and its hydration is constant. FFM can be predicted by BIA through equations developed using reference methods. Several BIA prediction equations exist for the estimation of FFM, skeletal muscle mass (SMM), or appendicular SMM. The BIA prediction models differ according to the characteristics of the sample in which they have been derived and validated in addition to the parameters included in the multiple regression analysis. In choosing BIA equations, it is important to consider the characteristics of the sample in which it has been developed and validated, since, for example, age- and ethnicity-related differences could sensitively affect BIA estimates.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s40520-016-0622-6

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 41 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sergi, G., De Rui, M., Stubbs, B., Veronese, N., & Manzato, E.
Affiliations
  • University of Padua (IT)
  • National Health Service (GB)
Venue
Aging Clinical and Experimental Research
Published
2016-08-27
Volume
29
Issue
4
Pages
591-597
ISSN
  • 1594-0667 (ISSN-L)
  • 1720-8319
OpenAlex
W2516060484
Cited by
291
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 39 · 2024: 44 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 5
FWCI
1.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Aging Clinical and Experimental Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Nova Science Publishers (Nova Science Publishers, Inc.) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Padua Research Archive (University of Padova) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Electrical and Bioimpedance Tomography
Keywords
bioelectrical impedance analysis, lean body mass, fat-free mass, body composition, skeletal muscle mass, appendicular skeletal muscle mass, measurement reliability, hydration, nutritional assessment, aging
MeSH terms
Aging, Body Composition, Humans, Nutritional Status, Regression Analysis, Thinness, Reproducibility of Results, Electric Impedance, Muscle, Skeletal

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review