Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28493988›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Prediction of whole-body fat percentage and visceral adipose tissue mass from five anthropometric variables.

Michelle G Swainson, Alan M Batterham, Costas Tsakirides, Zoe H Rutherford, Karen Hind

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 145 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
145citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

85 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors.

Michelle G SwainsonInstitute of Sport, Physical Activity and Leisure, Leeds Beckett University, Headingley, Leeds, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5223-8710
Alan M BatterhamHealth and Social Care Institute, Teesside University, Middlesbrough, United Kingdom.
Costas TsakiridesInstitute of Sport, Physical Activity and Leisure, Leeds Beckett University, Headingley, Leeds, United Kingdom.
Zoe H RutherfordInstitute of Sport, Physical Activity and Leisure, Leeds Beckett University, Headingley, Leeds, United Kingdom.
Karen HindInstitute of Sport, Physical Activity and Leisure, Leeds Beckett University, Headingley, Leeds, United Kingdom.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/K02325X/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe conventional measurement of obesity utilises the body mass index (BMI) criterion. Although there are benefits to this method, there is concern that not all individuals at risk of obesity-associated medical conditions are being identified. Whole-body fat percentage (%FM), and specifically visceral adipose tissue (VAT) mass, are correlated with and potentially implicated in disease trajectories, but are not fully accounted for through BMI evaluation. The aims of this study were (a) to compare five anthropometric predictors of %FM and VAT mass, and (b) to explore new cut-points for the best of these predictors to improve the characterisation of obesity.

methodsBMI, waist circumference (WC), waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), waist-to-height ratio (WHtR) and waist/height0.5 (WHT.5R) were measured and calculated for 81 adults (40 women, 41 men; mean (SD) age: 38.4 (17.5) years; 94% Caucasian). Total body dual energy X-ray absorptiometry with Corescan (GE Lunar iDXA, Encore version 15.0) was also performed to quantify %FM and VAT mass. Linear regression analysis, stratified by sex, was applied to predict both %FM and VAT mass for each anthropometric variable. Within each sex, we used information theoretic methods (Akaike Information Criterion; AIC) to compare models. For the best anthropometric predictor, we derived tentative cut-points for classifying individuals as obese (>25% FM for men or >35% FM for women, or > highest tertile for VAT mass).

resultsThe best predictor of both %FM and VAT mass in men and women was WHtR. Derived cut-points for predicting whole body obesity were 0.53 in men and 0.54 in women. The cut-point for predicting visceral obesity was 0.59 in both sexes.

conclusionsIn the absence of more objective measures of central obesity and adiposity, WHtR is a suitable proxy measure in both women and men. The proposed DXA-%FM and VAT mass cut-offs require validation in larger studies, but offer potential for improvement of obesity characterisation and the identification of individuals who would most benefit from therapeutic intervention.

Indexed as

Absorptiometry, PhotonAdipose TissueAdiposityAdultAgedBody Mass IndexFemaleHumansIntra-Abdominal FatMaleMiddle AgedObesityWaist CircumferenceWaist-Hip Ratio

Identifiers

PMID28493988
PMCPMC5426673

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.