Cited by 45Body Composition Measurement TechniquesNutrition and Health in AgingElectrical and Bioimpedance Tomography

New equations for estimating body cell mass from bioimpedance parallel models in healthy older Germans

Dittmar, Manuela, Reber, Helmut·2001·American Journal of Physiology-Endocrinology and Metabolism

Abstract

The objectives of this study were to assess for elderly Germans the validity of existing equations for predicting body cell mass (BCM) and to develop from single- and multifrequency bioimpedance (SFBIA, MFBIA) models new prediction equations. In a data-splitting approach, validation and cross-validation were performed in 160 healthy elderly (60- to 90-yr) subjects. BCM was determined using a tetrapolar bioimpedance analyzer (800 μA; 4 fixed frequencies: 1, 5, 50, and 100 kHz; electrodes placed to hand, wrist, ankle, and foot) and whole body 40 K counting as a reference method. New prediction equations were derived by multiple stepwise regression analysis. The Bland-Altman procedure was used for methods comparison. Relative to whole body counting, the manufacturer's equation overestimated BCM by 9% in men ( P < 0.0001, paired t-test) and 4% in women ( P = 0.002). Compared with the manufacturer's equation, the newly derived equations ( r = 0.92, RMSE = 6–9%) improved accuracy (pure error = 13 vs. 7–8%) and reduced bias and limits of agreement. SFBIA and MFBIA equations did not differ in precision or accuracy. We conclude that the newly derived equations improved BCM estimates in the elderly compared with existing equations. There was no advantage of MFBIA over SFBIA equations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1152/ajpendo.2001.281.5.e1005

Cites

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 42 · Cited by 45

Authors
Dittmar, M., & Reber, H.
Affiliations
  • Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz (DE)
  • University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz (DE)
Venue
American Journal of Physiology-Endocrinology and Metabolism
Published
2001-11-01
Volume
281
Issue
5
Pages
E1005-E1014
ISSN
  • 0193-1849 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-1555
OpenAlex
W2288030777
Cited by
45
References
42
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 4
FWCI
0.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Physiology-Endocrinology and Metabolism (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Electrical and Bioimpedance Tomography
Keywords
body cell mass, bioimpedance, prediction equations, older adults, multifrequency bioimpedance, equation validation
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Body Composition, Extracellular Space, Female, Germany, Humans, Male, Mathematics, Middle Aged, Models, Biological, Potassium Radioisotopes, Regression Analysis, Sensitivity and Specificity, Sex Characteristics, Whole-Body Counting, Bone Density, Linear Models, 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