Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29170699›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of exercise science

Validity of Arm-to-Arm BIA Devices Compared to DXA for Estimating % Fat in College Men and Women.

Rebecca A Rockamann, Emily K Dalton, Jana L Arabas, Liz Jorn, Jerry L Mayhew

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of exercise science. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

5 authors.

Rebecca A RockamannExercise Science Program, Truman State University, Kirksville, MO, USA.
Emily K DaltonExercise Science Program, Truman State University, Kirksville, MO, USA.
Jana L ArabasExercise Science Program, Truman State University, Kirksville, MO, USA.
Liz JornExercise Science Program, Truman State University, Kirksville, MO, USA.
Jerry L MayhewExercise Science Program, Truman State University, Kirksville, MO, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bioelectric impedance analysis (BIA) devices are commonly used to estimate percent body fat (%fat), although validation of their accuracy varies widely. The purpose of this study was to assess the validity of four commonly used BIA devices compared to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). College-aged men (n = 29, age = 19.7 ± 1.2 y, weight = 76.9 ± 12.5 kg) and women (n = 31, age = 20.5 ± 0.8 y, weight = 61.5 ± 9.2 kg) were evaluated for %fat using four single-frequency (50 mHz) BIA devices and DXA. A gender × device repeated measures ANOVA indicated some less expensive BIA devices produced %fat values that were not significantly different from DXA. A thumb-to-thumb BIA device produced the closest values in men (21.9 ± 6.6%) and women (32.1 ± 5.3%) compared to DXA (20.6 ± 6.1% and 30.3 ± 5.4%, respectively). The two more expensive BIA devices significantly underestimated in men (14.7 ± 5.8% and 17.0 ± 5.6%) and women (23.3 ± 4.2% and 23.3 ± 4.2%) compared to DXA. Interclass correlation coefficients with DXA were higher for the more expensive devices in men (ICC = 0.899 and 0.958) than the less expensive devices (ICC = 0.681 and 0.730). In women, all BIA devices showed moderate correlations with DXA (ICC = 0.537 to 0.658). Despite the convenience of simple BIA devices, their use in estimating body composition in young men and women might be questionable due to large variations in the differences between DXA and each device in this study.

Indexed as

bioelectric impedance analysisbody compositionDual-energy x-ray absorptiometrygender difference

Identifiers

PMID29170699
PMCPMC5685086

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.