Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36138057›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Measurement of subcutaneous fat tissue: reliability and comparison of caliper and ultrasound via systematic body mapping.

Jana Hoffmann, Jens Thiele, Stefan Kwast, Michael Andrew Borger, Thomas Schröter, Roberto Falz, Martin Busse

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

7 authors.

Jana HoffmannInstitute of Sports Medicine and Prevention, University of Leipzig, 04103, Leipzig, Germany. jana.hoffmann@uni-leipzig.de.
Jens ThieleDepartment of Radiology, Helios Klinik, 04435, Schkeuditz, Germany.
Stefan KwastInstitute of Sports Medicine and Prevention, University of Leipzig, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.
Michael Andrew BorgerUniversity Department of Cardiac Surgery, Heart Center Leipzig, 04289, Leipzig, Germany.
Thomas SchröterUniversity Department of Cardiac Surgery, Heart Center Leipzig, 04289, Leipzig, Germany.
Roberto FalzInstitute of Sports Medicine and Prevention, University of Leipzig, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.
Martin BusseInstitute of Sports Medicine and Prevention, University of Leipzig, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Caliper and ultrasound (US) are used to measure subcutaneous fat tissue depth (SFT) and then to calculate total body fat. There is no evidence-based recommendation as to whether caliper or US are equally accurate. The aim of this paper was therefore to compare reliability of both methods. In this methodical study, 54 participants (BMI: 24.8 ± 3.5 kg/m

Indexed as

AbdomenSubcutaneous FatAdultHumansMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsUltrasonographyYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID36138057
PMCPMC9500055

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.