ArticleObesity facts2013
Reproducibility of regional DEXA examinations of abdominal fat and lean tissue.
Article in Obesity facts, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- GDF8 and activin A are the key negative regulators of muscle mass in postmenopausal females: a randomized phase I trial.Nature communications · 2025Trial
- Muscle distribution in relation to all-cause and cause-specific mortality in young and middle-aged adults.Journal of translational medicine · 2023Article
- The risk of sarcopenia 24 months after bariatric surgery - assessment by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA): a prospective study.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2020Article
- How unmeasured muscle mass affects estimated GFR and diagnostic inaccuracy.EClinicalMedicine · 2020Article
- Resistance training status modifies inflammatory response to explosive and hypertrophic resistance exercise bouts.Journal of physiology and biochemistry · 2017Article
- Measurement of body composition in response to a short period of overfeeding.Journal of physiological anthropology · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to develop and test the validity of a new repeatable method to delimit abdominal areas for follow-up of fat mass (FM) and lean tissue mass (LM) in DEXA examinations.
methods37 male volunteers underwent two DEXA examinations. Total body FM and LM measurements and corresponding abdominal measurements in a carefully defined region were calculated from the first scan. After repositioning of the subjects and a second scan, the delimited region was copied and the abdominal tissues re-calculated.
resultsThe mean LM of the abdominal area was 2.804 kg (SD 0.556), and the mean FM was 1.026 kg (SD 0.537). The intra-class correlation coefficient for the repeated abdominal LM, FM, and LM/FM ratio measurements was 0.99. The mean difference (bias) for the repeated abdominal LM measurements was -13 g (95% confidence interval (CI) -193.0 to 166.8), and for the repeated abdominal FM measurements it was -35 g (95% CI -178.9 to 108.5).
conclusionsThe results indicate that regional DEXA is a sensitive method with excellent reproducibility in the measurements of the abdominal fat and lean tissues. The method may serve as a useful tool for evaluation and follow-up of various dietary and training programmes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.