ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2022
Comparison of body fat percentage assessments by bioelectrical impedance analysis, anthropometrical prediction equations, and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in older women.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Applications of bioimpedance measurement in clinical and allied fields: a comprehensive review.Biomedical engineering online · 2026Review
- Evaluation of Skinfolds Based Predictive Equations for Estimating Body Fat Percentage in Older Adults: A Comparison Using Digital Adipometer (Lipowise) and Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry (DXA).Clinical obesity · 2026Article
- Article
- Acid-Base and Electrolyte Balance Responses in the Performance of Female Ultramarathon Runners in a 45 km Mountain Race.Nutrients · 2025Article
- Body composition measures assessed by bioelectrical impedance analysis and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in a sample of Brazilian adults and older adults.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- Assessment of body fat percentage in Emirati females: a comparative analysis of BIA vs. DXA.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- Medical weight loss in older persons with obesity.Clinical obesity · 2024Review
- The Clínica Universidad de Navarra-Body Adiposity Estimator index is a reliable tool for screening metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease: an analysis from a gender perspective.Lipids in health and disease · 2024Article
- Practical but Inaccurate? A-Mode Ultrasound and Bioelectrical Impedance Underestimate Body Fat Percentage Compared to Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry in Male College Students.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2024Article
- Validation of skinfold equations and alternative methods for the determination of fat-free mass in young athletes.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Individuals with high body fat have a higher risk of mortality. Numerous anthropometric-based predictive equations are available for body composition assessments; furthermore, bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) estimates are available. However, in older adults, the validity of body fat estimates requires further investigation. Objective: To assess the agreement between percentage body fat (BF%) estimates by BIA and five predictive equations based on anthropometric characteristics using dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) as reference method. A secondary objective was to identify whether excluding short-stature women improves the agreement of BF% estimates in a group of community-dwelling, older Mexican women. Methods: A concordance analysis of BF% was performed. A total of 121 older women participated in the study. Anthropometric information, BIA, and DXA body composition estimates were obtained. Five equations using anthropometric data were evaluated in order to determine body fat percentage (BF%) using DXA as reference method. Paired Results: The mean age of the study participants was 73.7 (±5.8) years old. BIA and the anthropometric based equations examined showed mean significant differences when tested in the entire sample. For the taller women (height > 145 cm), no significant difference in the paired comparison was found between DXA and BIA of BF% estimates. The mean BF% was 40.3 (±4.8) and 40.7 (±6.2) for DXA and BIA, respectively. The concordance between methods was good (CCC 0.814), (SEE 2.62). Also, in the taller women subset, the Woolcott equation using waist-to-height ratio presented no significant difference in the paired comparison; however, the error of the estimates was high (SEE 3.37) and the concordance was moderate (CCC 0.693). Conclusion: This study found that BIA yielded good results in the estimation of BF% among women with heights over 145 cm. Also, in this group, the Woolcott predictive equation based on waist circumference and height ratio showed no significant differences compared to DXA in the paired comparison; however, the large error of estimates observed may limit its application. In older women, short stature may impact the validity of the body fat percentage estimates of anthropometric-based predictive equations.
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.