A comparison of three methods to assess body composition.
Abstract
Objective The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of measurements of body composition made using dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), analysis of computed tomography (CT) scans at the L3 vertebral level, and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA).Methods DXA, CT, and BIA were performed in 47 patients recruited from two clinical trials investigating metabolic changes associated with major abdominal surgery or neoadjuvant chemotherapy for esophagogastric cancer. DXA was performed the week before surgery and before and after commencement of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. BIA was performed at the same time points and used with standard equations to calculate fat-free mass (FFM). Analysis of CT scans performed within 3 mo of the study was used to estimate FFM and fat mass (FM).Results There was good correlation between FM on DXA and CT (r 2 = 0.6632; P < 0.0001) and FFM on DXA and CT (r 2 = 0.7634; P < 0.0001), as well as FFM on DXA and BIA (r 2 = 0.6275; P < 0.0001). Correlation between FFM on CT and BIA also was significant (r 2 = 0.2742; P < 0.0001). On Bland-Altman analysis, average bias for FM on DXA and CT was 0.2564 with 95% limits of agreement (LOA) of -9.451 to 9.964. For FFM on DXA and CT, average bias was -0.1477, with LOA of -8.621 to 8.325. For FFM on DXA and BIA, average bias was -3.792, with LOA of -15.52 to 7.936. For FFM on CT and BIA, average bias was -2.661, with LOA of -22.71 to 17.39.Conclusion Although a systematic error underestimating FFM was demonstrated with BIA, it may be a useful modality to quantify body composition in the clinical situation.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Whole-body-based techniques such as anthropometry and BIA are viable alternatives for clinical evaluation because they are non-invasive, portable, and relatively low cost.
“Whole-body-based techniques, such as anthropometry and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), used as predictors in regression equations, developed and validated using DXA as the reference method, are a viable alternative for clinical evaluation since they are non-invasive, ideal for quantitative estimates of FFM and FM based on mathematical models, portable, and relatively low cost (9, 18, 19).”
From Development and Cross-Validation of a Predictive Equation for Fat-Free Mass in Brazilian Adolescents by Bioelectrical Impedance (2022) · cites this paper as [19]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 26 · Cited by 104
- Authors
- Tewari, N., Awad, S., Macdonald, I. A., & Lobo, D. N.
- Affiliations
- University of Nottingham (GB)
- Royal Derby Hospital (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Lobo, Dileep N.
- Venue
- Nutrition
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-03
- Volume
- 47
- Pages
- 1-5
- ISSN
- 0899-9007 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2760622449
- Cited by
- 104
- References
- 26
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 7
- FWCI
- 6.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Nutrition (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Medical Research Council (MR/P021220/1)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Bone health and osteoporosis research
- Keywords
- body composition, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, computed tomography, bioelectrical impedance analysis, fat-free mass, fat mass, method comparison, gastroesophageal cancer, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, abdominal surgery, measurement accuracy
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Anthropometry, Body Composition, Clinical Trials as Topic, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Reproducibility of Results, Cohort Studies, Absorptiometry, Photon, Electric Impedance
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