Cited by 6Body Composition Measurement TechniquesObesity, Physical Activity, DietBone health and osteoporosis research

Body fat prediction equations for skinfold and bioelectrical impedance analysis using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry data as the criterion.

Grove, Jared, Hung, You-Jou·2017·Journal of Physical Therapy and Sports Medicine

Abstract

Background and purpose: Body composition evaluation during health screenings and physical examination is important for health professionals (including physical therapists) to categorize health risk and prescribe appropriate exercise interventions. In addition to measuring bone mineral density, dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) can provide precise measurement of body fat percentage with minimal radiation exposure. However, having access to DXA is very costly and other common body fat measurements are no very accurate. The purpose of this study was to develop body fat prediction equations for bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) and skinfold measurement, using DXA data as the criterion. Methods: This was a within-group study with repeated measures. Sixty three college age students participated in the study. Subject’s body fat percentage was examined with DXA, BIA, and the 3-site skinfold measurements. Results: Body fat percentage measured with DXA (26.27% is significantly higher than those measured with skinfold (17.64% and BIA (20.70%). The DXA criterion regression equations were created for skinfold and BIA: DXA% BF=4.65+0.43 × S3SF (sum of 3 site skinfold in mm); DXA% BF=3.79+1.09 × BIA% BF. The new regression equations were further validated using 75% -25% subject crossvalidation. Discussion: Body fat percentage varies greatly among different measurements. Adjustments are necessary to accurately predict body fat percentage when using skinfold or BIA techniques at a c…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.35841/physical-therapy.1.1.5-11

Cites

39 of 39 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?

  • Whole-body-based techniques such as anthropometry and BIA are viable alternatives for clinical evaluation because they are non-invasive, portable, and relatively low cost.

    “Whole-body-based techniques, such as anthropometry and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), used as predictors in regression equations, developed and validated using DXA as the reference method, are a viable alternative for clinical evaluation since they are non-invasive, ideal for quantitative estimates of FFM and FM based on mathematical models, portable, and relatively low cost (9, 18, 19).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Grove, J., & Hung, Y.-J.
Affiliations
Angelo State University (US)
Corresponding author
Hung, You-Jou
Venue
Journal of Physical Therapy and Sports Medicine
Published
2017
Volume
01
Issue
01
OpenAlex
W2787504181
Cited by
6
References
39
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2017: 2
FWCI
0.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Bone health and osteoporosis research
Keywords
body fat percentage, body composition, skinfold thickness, bioelectrical impedance analysis, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, prediction equations, regression equations, measurement agreement, cardiovascular risk screening, health promotion, university students

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