Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32525949›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Multiple measures derived from 3D photonic body scans improve predictions of fat and muscle mass in young Swiss men.

Roman Sager, Sabine Güsewell, Frank Rühli, Nicole Bender, Kaspar Staub

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Roman SagerMedical Faculty, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Sabine GüsewellInstitute of Evolutionary Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Frank RühliInstitute of Evolutionary Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Nicole BenderInstitute of Evolutionary Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Kaspar StaubInstitute of Evolutionary Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-3951-1807
University of Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDigital tools like 3D laser-based photonic scanners, which can assess external anthropometric measurements for population based studies, and predict body composition, are gaining in importance. Here we focus on a) systematic deviation between manually determined and scanned standard measurements, b) differences regarding the strength of association between these standard measurements and body composition, and c) improving these predictions of body composition by considering additional scan measurements.

methodsWe analysed 104 men aged 19-23. Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis was used to estimate whole body fat mass, visceral fat mass and skeletal muscle mass (SMM). For the 3D body scans, an Anthroscan VITUSbodyscan was used to automatically obtain 90 body shape measurements. Manual anthropometric measurements (height, weight, waist circumference) were also taken.

resultsScanned and manually measured height, waist circumference, waist-to-height-ratio, and BMI were strongly correlated (Spearman Rho>0.96), however we also found systematic differences. When these variables were used to predict body fat or muscle mass, explained variation and prediction standard errors were similar between scanned and manual measurements. The univariable predictions performed well for both visceral fat (r2 up to 0.92) and absolute fat mass (AFM, r2 up to 0.87) but not for SMM (r2 up to 0.54). Of the 90 body scanner measures used in the multivariable prediction models, belly circumference and middle hip circumference were the most important predictors of body fat content. Stepwise forward model selection using the AIC criterion showed that the best predictive power (r2 up to 0.99) was achieved with models including 49 scanner measurements.

conclusionThe use of a 3D full body scanner produced results that strongly correlate to manually measured anthropometric measures. Predictions were improved substantially by including multiple measurements, which can only be obtained with a 3D body scanner, in the models.

Indexed as

AdiposityAbdominal FatBody SizeElectric ImpedanceHumansImaging, Three-DimensionalMaleMilitary PersonnelMuscle, SkeletalOptical ImagingReproducibility of ResultsSwitzerlandYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID32525949
PMCPMC7289400
OpenAlexW3035314986

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.