1996PubMedRequires access

The influence of fat free mass on prediction of densitometric body composition by bioelectrical impedance analysis and by anthropometry.

Thang S. Han, Robert Carter, James Currall, Michael E. J. Lean

Open publisher page 12 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of varying size of fat free mass (FFM) on the precision and bias of body composition prediction by bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) from four equations of Segal et al (BIA-Segal), Gray et al (BIA-Gray, Lukaski et al (BIA-Lukaski) and those from a manufacturer (BIA-EZC), by body mass index (BMI), and by skinfold methods with reference to estimation by densitometry. SUBJECTS: 73 men and 77 women aged 17-71 years, were measured for height, weight, FFM, bioelectrical impedance and age. RESULTS: BIA-Segal gave the highest precision (men: R2 = 83%, women: R2 = 75%) and the least bias (men: slope = 0.88; women: slope = 0.81) of all BIA methods. There were poorer precision (R2 < or = 50%) and more bias (slope < 0.70) by BIA-Lukaski and BIA-EZC in both sexes, which were comparable to the simpler BMI method. The skinfold method gave R2 = 83% and slope = 0.84 in men and R2 = 61% and slope = 0.86 in women. Bland and Altman analysis showed BIA-Segal gave prediction of FFM within +/-6 kg of 95% confidence interval limit of agreement of that estimated by UWW in most subjects. Other BIA methods presented unacceptably large underestimates of up to 15-17 kg in FFM. CONCLUSIONS: The BIA-Segal provide the best predictions of the methods tested, but using BMI-or waist-specific equations may be more practical than the original BIA-Segal method, which BIA methods are affected by large FFM, and not better than anthropometric methods in predicting FFM.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of varying size of fat free mass (FFM) on the precision and bias of body composition prediction by bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) from four equations of Segal et al (BIA-Segal), Gray et al (BIA-Gray, Lukaski et al (BIA-Lukaski) and those from a manufacturer (BIA-EZC), by body mass index (BMI), and by skinfold methods with reference to estimation by densitometry. SUBJECTS: 73 men and 77 women aged 17-71 years, were measured for height, weight, FFM, bioelectrical impedance and age. RESULTS: BIA-Segal gave the highest precision (men: R2 = 83%, women: R2 = 75%) and the least bias (men: slope = 0.88; women: slope = 0.81) of all BIA methods. There were poorer precision (R2 < or = 50%) and more bias (slope < 0.70) by BIA-Lukaski and BIA-EZC in both sexes, which were comparable to the simpler BMI method. The skinfold method gave R2 = 83% and slope = 0.84 in men and R2 = 61% and slope = 0.86 in women. Bland and Altman analysis showed BIA-Segal gave prediction of FFM within +/-6 kg of 95% confidence interval limit of agreement of that estimated by UWW in most subjects. Other BIA methods presented unacceptably large underestimates of up to 15-17 kg in FFM. CONCLUSIONS: The BIA-Segal provide the best predictions of the methods tested, but using BMI-or waist-specific equations may be more practical than the original BIA-Segal method, which BIA methods are affected by large FFM, and not better than anthropometric methods in predicting FFM.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 12 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of varying size of fat free mass (FFM) on the precision and bias of body composition prediction by bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) from four equations of Segal et al (BIA-Segal), Gray et al (BIA-Gray, Lukaski et al (BIA-Lukaski) and those from a manufacturer (BIA-EZC), by body mass index (BMI), and by skinfold methods with reference to estimation by densitometry. SUBJECTS: 73 men and 77 women aged 17-71 years, were measured for height, weight, FFM, bioelectrical impedance and age. RESULTS: BIA-Segal gave the highest precision (men: R2 = 83%, women: R2 = 75%) and the least bias (men: slope = 0.88; women: slope = 0.81) of all BIA methods. There were poorer precision (R2 < or = 50%) and more bias (slope < 0.70) by BIA-Lukaski and BIA-EZC in both sexes, which were comparable to the simpler BMI method. The skinfold method gave R2 = 83% and slope = 0.84 in men and R2 = 61% and slope = 0.86 in women. Bland and Altman analysis showed BIA-Segal gave prediction of FFM within +/-6 kg of 95% confidence interval limit of agreement of that estimated by UWW in most subjects. Other BIA methods presented unacceptably large underestimates of up to 15-17 kg in FFM. CONCLUSIONS: The BIA-Segal provide the best predictions of the methods tested, but using BMI-or waist-specific equations may be more practical than the original BIA-Segal method, which BIA methods are affected by large FFM, and not better than anthropometric methods in predicting FFM.

Key concepts: Bioelectrical impedance analysis, Anthropometry, Limits of agreement, Fat free mass, Confidence interval, Body mass index, Densitometry, Mathematics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The influence of fat free mass on prediction of densitometric body composition by bioelectrical impedance analysis and by anthropometry. — Research Paper | ScholarLens