Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31132777›Full record

ArticleObesity facts2019

Limitations of Fat-Free Mass for the Assessment of Muscle Mass in Obesity.

Björn Jensen, Wiebke Braun, Corinna Geisler, Markus Both, Kristin Klückmann, Manfred J Müller, Anja Bosy-Westphal

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Obesity facts, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

58 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Understanding Impact of Anti-Obesity Medications on Skeletal Muscle Mass Change Is Confounded by Measurement Methods.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2026
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
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.

Björn Jensenseca gmbh & co. kg, Hamburg, Germany.
Wiebke BraunInstitut für Humanernährung und Lebensmittelkunde, Christian-Albrechts-Universität Kiel, Kiel, Germany.
Corinna GeislerInstitut für Humanernährung und Lebensmittelkunde, Christian-Albrechts-Universität Kiel, Kiel, Germany.
Markus BothKlinik für Diagnostische Radiologie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany.
Kristin Klückmannseca gmbh & co. kg, Hamburg, Germany.
Manfred J MüllerInstitut für Humanernährung und Lebensmittelkunde, Christian-Albrechts-Universität Kiel, Kiel, Germany.
Anja Bosy-WestphalInstitut für Humanernährung und Lebensmittelkunde, Christian-Albrechts-Universität Kiel, Kiel, Germany, abosyw@nutrition.uni-kiel.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA high amount of adipose tissue limits the accuracy of methods for body composition analysis in obesity.

objectivesThe aim was to quantify and explain differences in fat-free mass (FFM) (as an index of skeletal muscle mass, SMM) measured with bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), air displacement plethysmography (ADP), and deuterium dilution in comparison to multicompartment models, and to improve the results of BIA for obese subjects.

methodsIn 175 healthy subjects (87 men and 88 women, BMI 20-43.3 kg/m2, 18-65 years), FFM measured by these methods was compared with results from a 3- (3C) and a 4-compartment (4C) model. FFM4C was compared with SMM measured by magnetic resonance imaging.

resultsBIA and DXA overestimated and ADP underestimated FFM in comparison to 3C and 4C models with increasing BMI (all p < 0.001). -Differences were largest for DXA. In obesity, BIA results were improved: valuecorrected = -valueuncorrected - a(BMI - 30 kg/m2), a = 0.256 for FFM and a = 0.298 for SMM. SMM accounts for 45% of FFM in women and 49% in men.

conclusionsIn obesity, the use of FFM is limited by a systematic error of reference methods. In addition, SMM accounts for about 50% of FFM only. Corrected measurement of SMM by BIA can overcome these drawbacks.

Indexed as

Body CompositionElectric ImpedanceAbsorptiometry, PhotonAdipose TissueAdolescentAdultAgedBody Weights and MeasuresFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMuscle, SkeletalObesityOrgan SizePlethysmographyBioelectrical impedance analysisFat-free massFour-compartment modelSarcopeniaSkeletal muscle mass

Identifiers

PMID31132777
PMCPMC6696776

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.