CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 375Body Composition Measurement TechniquesAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsCardiovascular Disease and Adiposity

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Imaging techniques for measuring adipose-tissue distribution—a comparison between computed tomography and 1.5-T magnetic resonance

Open access
Seidell, JC, Bakker, CJ, van der Kooy, K·1990·The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
DOI 10.1093/ajcn/51.6.953
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

We developed a method for calculating adipose-tissue areas from transverse body scans by magnetic-resonance imaging (MRI). The method is based on an inversion recovery experiment (repetition time 820 ms, inversion delay time 300 ms, and echo time 20 ms). Total-fat areas and subcutaneous-fat areas were calculated by this method and by computed tomography (CT) from abdominal scans taken in seven male volunteers. The SEE ranged from 4.4 cm2 (CV 4.4%) for subcutaneous-fat areas to 8.3 cm2 (CV 12.8%) for visceral-fat areas. The reproducibility of measuring fat areas with MRI was assessed in seven other volunteers (four males, three females). The average errors of the method for different fat areas were 5.4%, 10.6%, and 10.1% for total-, visceral-, and subcutaneous-fat areas, respectively. We conclude that CT and MRI may yield different absolute values of fat areas (especially visceral fat) but that the ranking of individuals on the basis of their fat areas will be similar by both methods.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/ajcn/51.6.953

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Kvist, 1988, Adipose tissue volume determination in males by computed tomography., Int J Obesity, 12, 249
  2. Fuller, 1985, Estimation of body fat by nuclear magnetic resonance imaging., Proc Nutr Soc, 44, 108A
  3. McNeil, 1989, Body fat in lean and obese women measured by six methods., Proc Nutr Soc, 48, 23A

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 375

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Seidell, J., Bakker, C., & van der Kooy, K.
Affiliations
Wageningen University & Research (NL)
ORCID
Bakker, CJ
Venue
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1990-06
Volume
51
Issue
6
Pages
953-957
ISSN
0002-9165 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1093/ajcn/51.6.953
OpenAlex
W2163925164
Cited by
375
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 16
FWCI
5.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • VU Research Portal (publishedVersion)
  • Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (acceptedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology (medical) › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Disease and Adiposity
Keywords
body fat distribution, visceral fat, subcutaneous adipose tissue, magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, measurement reproducibility, method comparison, abdominal imaging
MeSH terms
Adipose Tissue, Adult, Body Composition, Body Height, Body Weight, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Tomography, X-Ray Computed

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