ArticleInternational journal of exercise science2018
Comparison of Techniques for Tracking Body Composition Changes across a Season in College Women Basketball Players.
Article in International journal of exercise science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Body Fat of Basketball Players: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Sports medicine - open · 2022Pooled it
- Effect of pre-season and in-season training on anthropometric variables, somatotype, body composition and body proportion in elite basketball players.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Body composition in professional female netball players within and between seasons: a cohort study.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2021Article
- Concordance Among Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis Measures of Percent Body Fat in Athletic Young Adults.International journal of exercise science · 2019Article
- Concordance in prediction body fat percentage of Brazilian women in reproductive age between different methods of evaluation of skinfolds thickness.Archives of endocrinology and metabolismArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Body composition assessment has become an integral part of athletes' training schedules. Questions remain concerning the accuracy of various methods to track body composition changes over a competitive year cycle. The purpose of this study was to compare various methods of tracking body composition across a college women's basketball season. Fourteen Division II women (age = 20.1 ± 1.2 y) were measured prior to the season (T1), after pre-season conditioning (T2), at mid-season (T3), and at the end of the season (T4) using skinfolds (SKF), two bioelectric impedance analysis (BIA) devices, and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). BIA devices were hand-to-hand (H-BIA) and foot-to-foot (F-BIA) single-frequency models. SKF were used to estimate %fat using four prediction equations. A method × trial factorial ANOVA on %fat with repeated measures over the second factor indicated that all methods except the Durnin-Womersley SKF equation were significantly lower than DXA. Across trials, DXA %fat at T1 (25.3 ± 4.7%) was significantly higher than at T2 (24.3 ± 4.6%), T3 (24.6 ± 4.6%), and T4 (24.4 ± 5.1%). Agreement between DXA and the other methods were moderate (r = 0.48 - 0.86). Rank-order correlations of DXA with the other methods to compare team order indicated H-BIA (rho = 0.67 - 0.78) and F-BIA (rho = 0.62 - 0.77) provided comparable agreement, with SKF methods having lower agreement for team order (rho = 0.46 - 0.73). Compared to the DXA standard, a foot-to-foot BIA device may provide adequate but significantly lower relative tracking of %fat across a women's basketball season.
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.