ArticleEuropean journal of applied physiology2018
Influence of subject presentation on interpretation of body composition change after 6 months of self-selected training and diet in athletic males.
Article in European journal of applied physiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Influence of Acute Water Ingestion and Prolonged Standing on Raw Bioimpedance and Subsequent Body Fluid and Composition Estimates.Journal of electrical bioimpedance · 2022Article
- Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeHigh precision body composition assessment methods accurately monitor physique traits in athletes. The acute impact of subject presentation (ad libitum food and fluid intake plus physical activity) on body composition estimation using field and laboratory methods has been quantified, but the impact on interpretation of longitudinal change is unknown. This study evaluated the impact of athlete presentation (standardised versus non-standardised) on interpretation of change in physique traits over time. Thirty athletic males (31.2 ± 7.5 years; 182.2 ± 6.5 cm; 91.7 ± 10.3 kg; 27.6 ± 2.6 kg/m
methodsTests were conducted after an overnight fast (BASEam) and ~ 7 h later after ad libitum food/fluid and physical activity (BASEpm). This procedure was repeated 6 months later (POSTam and POSTpm). Magnitude of changes in the mean was assessed by standardisation.
resultsAfter 6 months of self-selected training and diet, standardised presentation testing (BASEam to POSTam) identified trivial changes from the smallest worthwhile effect (SWE) in fat-free mass (FFM) and fat mass (FM) for all methods except for BIS (FM) where there was a large change (7.2%) from the SWE. Non-standardised follow-up testing (BASEam to POSTpm) showed trivial changes from the SWE except for small changes in FFM (BOD POD) of 1.1%, and in FM (3C and 4C models) of 6.4 and 3.5%. Large changes from the SWE were found in FFM (BIS, 3C and 4C models) of 2.2, 1.8 and 1.8% and in FM (BIS) of 6.4%. Non-standardised presentation testing (BASEpm to POSTpm) identified trivial changes from the SWE in FFM except for BIS which was small (1.1%). A moderate change from the SWE was found for BOD POD (3.3%) and large for BIS (9.4%) in FM estimations.
conclusionsChanges in body composition utilising non-standardised presentation were more substantial and often in the opposite direction to those identified using standardised presentation, causing misinterpretation of change in physique traits. Standardised presentation prior to body composition assessment for athletic populations should be advocated to enhance interpretation of true change.
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.