Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33467338›Full record

ArticleJournal of functional morphology and kinesiology2019

Comparison of Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) Versus a Multi-Frequency Bioelectrical Impedance (InBody 770) Device for Body Composition Assessment after a 4-Week Hypoenergetic Diet.

Jose Antonio, Madaline Kenyon, Anya Ellerbroek, Cassandra Carson, Victoria Burgess, Denvyr Tyler-Palmer, Jonathan Mike, Justin Roberts, Gerseli Angeli, Corey Peacock

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing 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

61 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Metabolic profiles associated with fat loss in Parkinson's disease.Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry · 2026
    Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational

1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

10 authors.

Jose AntonioExercise and Sport Science, Nova Southeastern University, Davie, FL 33328, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8930-1058
Madaline KenyonExercise and Sport Science, Nova Southeastern University, Davie, FL 33328, USA.
Anya EllerbroekExercise and Sport Science, Nova Southeastern University, Davie, FL 33328, USA.
Cassandra CarsonExercise and Sport Science, Nova Southeastern University, Davie, FL 33328, USA.
Victoria BurgessExercise and Sport Science, Nova Southeastern University, Davie, FL 33328, USA.
Denvyr Tyler-PalmerExercise and Sport Science, Nova Southeastern University, Davie, FL 33328, USA.
Jonathan MikeExercise Science, Grand Canyon University, Phoenix, AZ 85017, USA.
Justin RobertsCambridge Centre for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge CB1 1PT, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3169-2041
Gerseli AngeliRua Botucatú 740-Edif. Octávio de Carvalho, 04023-900 São Paulo, Brazil.
Corey PeacockExercise and Sport Science, Nova Southeastern University, Davie, FL 33328, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation was to compare two different methods of assessing body composition (i.e., a multi-frequency bioelectrical impedance analysis (MF-BIA) and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA)) over a four-week treatment period in exercise-trained men and women. Subjects were instructed to reduce their energy intake while maintaining the same exercise regimen for a period of four weeks. Pre and post assessments for body composition (i.e., fat-free mass, fat mass, percent body fat) were determined via the MF-BIA and DXA. On average, subjects reduced their energy intake by ~18 percent. The MF-BIA underestimated fat mass and percentage body fat and overestimated fat-free mass in comparison to the DXA. However, when assessing the change in fat mass, fat-free mass or percent body fat, there were no statistically significant differences between the MF-BIA vs. DXA. Overall, the change in percent body fat using the DXA vs. the MF-BIA was -1.3 ± 0.9 and -1.4 ± 1.8, respectively. Our data suggest that when tracking body composition over a period of four weeks, the MF-BIA may be a viable alternative to the DXA in exercise-trained men and women.

Indexed as

body compositiondietexerciseexercise-trainedfat-free massfat mass

Identifiers

PMID33467338
PMCPMC7739224

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.