Cited by 122Body Composition Measurement TechniquesSports Performance and TrainingPhysical Education and Training Studies

Comparison of total and segmental body composition using DXA and multifrequency bioimpedance in collegiate female athletes

Esco, Michael R., Snarr, Ronald L., Leatherwood, Matthew D., Chamberlain, Nik A., Redding, Melvenia L., Flatt, Andrew A., Moon, Jordan R., Williford, Henry N.·2015·Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation was to determine the agreement between multifrequency bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) for measuring body fat percentage (BF%), fat-free mass (FFM), and total body and segmental lean soft tissue (LST) in collegiate female athletes. Forty-five female athletes (age = 21.2 ± 2.0 years, height = 166.1 ± 7.1 cm, weight = 62.6 ± 9.9 kg) participated in this study. Variables measured through BIA and DXA were as follows: BF%, FFM, and LST of the arms (ARMS(LST)), the legs (LEGS(LST)), the trunk (TRUNK(LST)), and the total body (TOTAL(LST)). Compared with the DXA, the InBody 720 provided significantly lower values for BF% (-3.3%, p < 0.001) and significantly higher values for FFM (2.1 kg, p < 0.001) with limits of agreement (1.96 SD of the mean difference) of ±5.6% for BF% and ±3.7 kg for FFM. No significant differences (p < 0.008) existed between the 2 devices (InBody 720-DXA) for ARMS(LST) (0.05 kg), TRUNK(LST) (0.14 kg), LEGS(LST) (-0.4 kg), and TOTAL(LST) (-0.21 kg). The limits of agreement were ±0.79 kg for ARMS(LST), ±2.62 kg for LEGS(LST), ±3.18 kg for TRUNK(LST), and ±4.23 kg for TOTAL(LST). This study found discrepancies in BF% and FFM between the 2 devices. However, the InBody 720 and DXA appeared to provide excellent agreement for measuring total body and segmental LST. Therefore, the InBody 720 may be a rapid noninvasive method to assess LST in female athletes when DXA is not available.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1519/jsc.0000000000000732

Cites

Statistics

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

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 31 · Cited by 122

Authors
Esco, M. R., Snarr, R. L., Leatherwood, M. D., Chamberlain, N. A., Redding, M. L., Flatt, A. A., Moon, J. R., & Williford, H. N.
Affiliations
  • University of Alabama (US)
  • Auburn University at Montgomery (US)
  • MusclePharm Sports Science Institute (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
Esco, Michael R.
Venue
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Published
2015-04
Volume
29
Issue
4
Pages
918-925
ISSN
1064-8011 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2057387266
Cited by
122
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5
FWCI
2.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • BearWorks (Missouri State University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Sports Performance and Training
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Physical Education and Training Studies
Keywords
body composition, multifrequency bioelectrical impedance analysis, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, measurement agreement, body fat percentage, fat-free mass, female athletes, collegiate athletes
MeSH terms
Adipose Tissue, Arm, Female, Humans, Leg, Absorptiometry, Photon, Electric Impedance, Adiposity, Young Adult, Torso

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