Comparison of bioelectrical impedance analysis and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry for estimating bone mineral content
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to validate single-frequency hand-to-foot bioelectrical impedance analysis (HFBIA) for estimating bone mineral content (BMC) using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry as the criterion measure in healthy men and women aged 18–40 years. A total of 80 men and women participated in this study. BMC was estimated on the same day using HFBIA and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. The HFBIA device provided higher mean BMC values in men and the entire sample, but not in women. A smaller standard error of estimate was observed in women (0.20, corresponding to 8% of the mean reference BMC values) compared with men (0.39, corresponding to 12% of the mean reference BMC values) and the combined sample (0.31). HFBIA provided a smaller constant error and individual estimation error indicated by the 95% limits of agreement in women (−0.05 ± 0.39) compared with men (−0.16 ± 0.78) and the entire sample (−0.10 ± 0.63). In conclusion, although BMC values were found to be more accurate in women, HFBIA overestimated BMC compared with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, especially in individuals with lower values. Given these results, using HFBIA to measure BMC would be inappropriate for diagnostic purposes.
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?
Previous research has shown BIA scales to give inaccurate estimates of bone mineral content in comparison to DXA.
“Previous research has also shown BIA scales to give inaccurate estimates of bone mineral content in comparison to DXA [59,60], while other research has demonstrated that BIA-derived bone mineral content can be used in multi-compartment models in place of DXA [61].”
From The Utility of Body Composition Assessment in Nutrition and Clinical Practice: An Overview of Current Methodology (2021) · cites this paper as [59]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 26 · Cited by 17
- Authors
- Stone, T. M., Wingo, J. E., Nickerson, B. S., & Esco, M. R.
- Affiliations
- University of Alabama (US)
- Texas A&M International University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Stone, Tori M.
- Venue
- International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism
- Publisher
- Human Kinetics
- Published
- 2018-09-01
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 542-546
- ISSN
- 1526-484X (ISSN-L)
- 1543-2742
- OpenAlex
- W2783408388
- Cited by
- 17
- References
- 26
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 1.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Bone health and osteoporosis research
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Forensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies
- Keywords
- bioelectrical impedance analysis, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, bone mineral content, method validation, sex differences, healthy adults
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Absorptiometry, Photon, Bone Density, Electric Impedance, 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