Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25221994›Full record

ArticlePublic health nutrition2015

Body composition indices of a load-capacity model: gender- and BMI-specific reference curves.

Mario Siervo, Carla M Prado, Emily Mire, Stephanie Broyles, Jonathan C K Wells, Steven Heymsfield, Peter T Katzmarzyk

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Public health nutrition, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Mechanical Load-Capacity Models for Bone in Youth - Analysis of Risk Signatures.Journal of musculoskeletal & neuronal interactions · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Fat-Free Mass: Friend or Foe to Metabolic Health?Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Mario Siervo1Human Nutrition Research Centre,Institute of Cellular Medicine,Newcastle University,Campus of Ageing and Vitality,Newcastle upon Tyne NE4 5PL,UK.
Carla M Prado2Department of Agricultural,Food and Nutritional Science,Division of Human Nutrition,University of Alberta,Edmonton,Alberta,Canada.
Emily Mire3Pennington Biomedical Research Center,Baton Rouge,LA,USA.
Stephanie Broyles3Pennington Biomedical Research Center,Baton Rouge,LA,USA.
Jonathan C K Wells4Childhood Nutrition Research Centre,UCL Institute of Child Health,London,UK.
Steven Heymsfield3Pennington Biomedical Research Center,Baton Rouge,LA,USA.
Peter T Katzmarzyk3Pennington Biomedical Research Center,Baton Rouge,LA,USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveFat mass (FM) and fat-free mass (FFM) are frequently measured to define body composition phenotypes. The load-capacity model integrates the effects of both FM and FFM to improve disease-risk prediction. We aimed to derive age-, gender- and BMI-specific reference curves of load-capacity model indices in an adult population (≥18 years).

designCross-sectional study. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry was used to measure FM, FFM, appendicular skeletal muscle mass (ASM) and truncal fat mass (TrFM). Two metabolic load-capacity indices were calculated: ratio of FM (kg) to FFM (kg) and ratio of TrFM (kg) to ASM (kg). Age-standardised reference curves, stratified by gender and BMI (<25.0 kg/m2, 25.0-29.9 kg/m2, ≥30.0 kg/m2), were constructed using an LMS approach. Percentiles of the reference curves were 5th, 15th, 25th, 50th, 75th, 85th and 95th.

settingSecondary analysis of data from the 1999-2004 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). SUBJECTS: The population included 6580 females and 6656 males.

resultsThe unweighted proportions of obesity in males and females were 25.5 % and 34.7 %, respectively. The average values of both FM:FFM and TrFM:ASM were greater in female and obese subjects. Gender and BMI influenced the shape of the association of age with FM:FFM and TrFM:ASM, as a curvilinear relationship was observed in female and obese subjects. Menopause appeared to modify the steepness of the reference curves of both indices.

conclusionsThis is a novel risk-stratification approach integrating the effects of high adiposity and low muscle mass which may be particularly useful to identify cases of sarcopenic obesity and improve disease-risk prediction.

Indexed as

AdiposityModels, BiologicalAbsorptiometry, PhotonAdultAlgorithmsBody Mass IndexCohort StudiesCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMuscle, SkeletalNutrition SurveysObesityOverweightPrevalenceAppendicular skeletal mass

Identifiers

PMID25221994
PMCPMC10272998

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.