ArticleEuropean journal of clinical nutrition2024
Body composition assessment in 6-month-old infants: A comparison of two- and three-compartment models using data from the Baby-bod study.
Article in European journal of clinical nutrition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- An assessment of methods for measuring body composition in full-term infants: A systematic review.Pediatric research · 2026Pooled it
- Body Composition Changes and Associations in Infants and Mothers During the First Year: Insights from a Pilot Study of the Baby-bod Project.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesAn appreciation of infant body composition is helpful to understand the 'quality' of growth in early life. Air displacement plethysmography (ADP) using PEA POD and the deuterium dilution (DD) technique are commonly used body composition approaches in infants. We evaluated the comparability of body composition assessed using both techniques with two-compartment (2C) and three-compartment (3C) models in 6-month-old infants. SUBJECTS/
methodsInfant fat mass (FM) and percent fat mass (%FM) obtained from a 2C model using PEA POD (2C-PP) and a 2C model using the deuterium dilution technique (2C-DD) were compared to those derived from a 3C model, and to each other, using Bland-Altman analysis and Deming regression.
resultsMeasurements were available from 68 infants (93% Caucasian, 53% male). The mean biases were not significant between any of the method comparisons. However, significant constant and proportional biases were identified in 2C-DD vs 3C and 2C-PP vs 2C-DD, but not in the 2C-PP vs 3C comparison. Furthermore, we observed significant associations between the mean differences and infants' percent total body water (%TBW).
conclusionsWhile no significant between-method mean differences were found in body composition estimates, some comparisons revealed significant constant and proportional biases and notable associations between the mean differences and %TBW were observed. Our results emphasise the importance of method choice, ensuring methodological uniformity in long-term studies, and carefully considering and regulating multiple pre-analytical variables, such as the hydration status of the participants.
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.