The DOI matches its Crossref record; 26 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Reliability and Agreement of Various InBody Body Composition Analyzers as Compared to Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry in Healthy Men and Women
Abstract
BACKGROUND Bioelectrical impedance analysis has evolved over the years to include the use of multiple frequencies and impedance measurements to improve the accuracy and reliability of body composition estimates. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the reliability of the InBody230, InBody720, and InBody770 to measure body fat percent (BF%), fat mass (FM), and fat-free mass (FFM) in the general population and to compare results to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). METHODS A total of 31 males and 36 females participated in 2 d of testing separated by 24-72 h. Each visit consisted of a DXA scan, and analysis with the InBody230, InBody720, and InBody770. RESULTS All 3 bioelectrical impedance devices (InBody230, InBody720, and InBody770) were reliable in men and women as indicated by high intraclass correlation coefficients for BF% (≥0.98), FM (≥0.98), and FFM (≥0.99) and low standard error of measurement for BF% (0.77%-0.99%), FM (0.54-0.87 kg), and FFM (0.58-0.84 kg) and minimum difference for BF% (2.12%-2.73%), FM (1.49-2.39 kg), and FFM (1.60-2.32 kg), respectively. When examining the agreement between the 3 InBody analyzers with DXA, systematic bias (underestimation of BF% and FM and overestimation of FFM) was present for all comparisons (p < 0.05) while proportional bias was present for FM in women and FFM in men. However, there was small individual error for all comparisons as indicated by the standard error of estimate and 95% limits of agreement. CONCLUSION The InBody analyzers produce small individual error, which suggest these methods can be used as a surrogate when DXA is not available; however, practitioners should be aware of the systematic bias for all comparisons and proportional bias for FM in women and FFM in men. Furthermore, findings revealed that the research grade models, InBody720 and InBody770, added minimal benefit over the portable InBody230 when assessing BF%, FM, and FFM.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT
Martin Bland, J., & Altman, D. (1986) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(86)90837-8 · Cited by 47,965
Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability.
Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420 · Cited by 24,532
Progressive Statistics for Studies in Sports Medicine and Exercise Science
HOPKINS, W. G., MARSHALL, S. W., BATTERHAM, A. M., & HANIN, J. (2009) · Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · doi:10.1249/mss.0b013e31818cb278 · Cited by 9,128
QUANTIFYING TEST-RETEST RELIABILITY USING THE INTRACLASS CORRELATION COEFFICIENT AND THE SEM
WEIR, J. P. (2005) · Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research · doi:10.1519/00124278-200502000-00038 · Cited by 4,842
Ling, C. H. Y., de Craen, A. J. M., Slagboom, P. E., Gunn, D. A., Stokkel, M. P. M., Westendorp, R. G. J., & Maier, A. B. (2011) · Clinical Nutrition · doi:10.1016/j.clnu.2011.04.001 · Cited by 645
Ackland, T. R., Lohman, T. G., Sundgot-Borgen, J., Maughan, R. J., Meyer, N. L., Stewart, A. D., & Müller, W. (2012) · Sports Medicine · doi:10.2165/11597140-000000000-00000 · Cited by 599
Body composition estimates from NHANES III bioelectrical impedance data
Chumlea, W., Guo, S., Kuczmarski, R., Flegal, K., Johnson, C., Heymsfield, S., Lukaski, H., Friedl, K., & Hubbard, V. (2002) · International Journal of Obesity · doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0802167 · Cited by 507
Lukaski, H. C. (2013) · European Journal of Clinical Nutrition · doi:10.1038/ejcn.2012.149 · Cited by 303
Moon, J. R. (2013) · European Journal of Clinical Nutrition · doi:10.1038/ejcn.2012.165 · Cited by 237
Shafer, K. J., Siders, W. A., Johnson, L. K., & Lukaski, H. C. (2009) · Nutrition · doi:10.1016/j.nut.2008.07.004 · Cited by 223
Cited by
New Frontiers of Body Composition in Sport
Lukaski, H., & Raymond-Pope, C. J. (2021) · International Journal of Sports Medicine · doi:10.1055/a-1373-5881 · Cited by 149
Park, J. H., Kim, J. Y., Choi, J. H., Park, H. S., Shin, H.-Y., Lee, J. M., Kim, J.-W., Ko, H.-J., Chon, S., Kim, B. K., et al. (2021) · International Journal of Obesity · doi:10.1038/s41366-021-00739-z · Cited by 48
Álvarez-Salvago, F., Lara-Ramos, A., Cantarero-Villanueva, I., Mazheika, M., Mundo-López, A., Galiano-Castillo, N., Fernández-Lao, C., Arroyo-Morales, M., Ocón-Hernández, O., & Artacho-Cordón, F. (2020) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph17103610 · Cited by 38
Sekulic, D., Prus, D., Zevrnja, A., Peric, M., & Zaletel, P. (2020) · Children · doi:10.3390/children7120297 · Cited by 18
Nguyen, P. H., Young, M. F., Khuong, L. Q., Ramakrishnan, U., Martorell, R., & Hoffman, D. J. (2020) · British Journal of Nutrition · doi:10.1017/s000711452000241x · Cited by 8
Metadata
- Authors
- McLester, C. N., Nickerson, B. S., Kliszczewicz, B. M., & McLester, J. R.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Densitometry
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-07
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 443-450
- ISSN
- 1094-6950 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2899212211
- Cited by
- 426
- References
- 26
- FWCI
- 13.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Reliability and Agreement of Various InBody Body Composition Analyzers as Compared to Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry in Healthy Men and Women. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jocd.2018.10.008
- The paper
- McLester, C. N., Nickerson, B. S., Kliszczewicz, B. M., & McLester, J. R. (2020). Reliability and Agreement of Various InBody Body Composition Analyzers as Compared to Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry in Healthy Men and Women. Journal of Clinical Densitometry. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocd.2018.10.008
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.