Cited by 51Body Composition Measurement TechniquesElectrical and Bioimpedance TomographyBariatric Surgery and Outcomes

Validity of multi-frequency bioelectric impedance methods to measure body composition in obese patients: a systematic review.

Becroft, Louise, Ooi, Geraldine, Forsyth, Adrienne, King, Susannah, Tierney, Audrey·2019·International Journal of Obesity

Abstract

Objective Excessive lean tissue loss following bariatric surgery may pose serious metabolic consequences. Accurate methods to assess body composition following bariatric surgery are required. This review aimed to investigate if multi-frequency bioelectric impedance (MF-BI) is a valid tool to determine body composition in obese patients.Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and CENTRAL databases were searched until March 2017. Included studies were published in English with obese (body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30 kg/m 2) adults measuring body composition with MF-BI methods in comparison with reference methods. Exclusions were pregnancy, animal studies, non-English language studies, single frequency BI. A total of 6395 studies were retrieved.Results Sixteen studies were eligible for inclusion. Sample sizes ranged from 15 to 157, with BMI 26-48 kg/m 2. MF-BI underestimated fat mass (FM) in 11 studies and overestimated fat-free mass (FFM) in nine studies in comparison with reference methods. Correlations of absolute values from MF-BI and reference methods for FM and FFM were high, however, agreement was lower at an individual level. When adjustments for BMI were made to machine algorithms, measurement accuracy improved. Significant heterogeneity was evident among included studies.Conclusions This review found that MF-BI is reliable for use at a group level. Obese-specific adjustment of algorithms for MF-BI machines increases the accuracy of absolute measures of body composition in obese individuals, improving their utility in the clinical setting. Multiple variables contributed a lack of consistency among studies included, highlighting the need for more robust studies that control confounding variables to establish clear validity assessment.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41366-018-0285-9

Cites

48 of 48 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Becroft, L., Ooi, G., Forsyth, A., King, S., & Tierney, A.
Affiliations
  • La Trobe University (AU)
  • The Alfred Hospital (AU)
Corresponding author
Becroft, Louise
Venue
International Journal of Obesity
Published
2018-12-19
Volume
43
Issue
8
Pages
1497-1507
ISSN
  • 0307-0565 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-5497
OpenAlex
W2904951475
Cited by
51
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2
FWCI
0.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Obesity (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Electrical and Bioimpedance Tomography
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Bariatric Surgery and Outcomes
Keywords
body composition, obesity, bariatric surgery, fat mass, fat-free mass, measurement validity, lean tissue loss
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Body Composition, Body Weights and Measures, Female, Health Personnel, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Obesity, Absorptiometry, Photon, Body Mass Index, Electric Impedance, Bariatric Surgery, Adiposity, Validation Studies as Topic, Young Adult

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