ArticleEuropean journal of clinical nutrition2024
Relative fat mass as an estimator of body fat percentage in Chilean adults.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Associations of relative fat mass with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease and liver fibrosis: evidence from the U.S. NHANES 2017-2023.BMC gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Association between low-density lipoprotein and structural changes in the knee joint of patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis is mediated by relative fat mass.European journal of medical research · 2026Article
- Obesity: Prevalence, causes, consequences, management, preventive strategies and future research directions.Metabolism open · 2025Review
- Association between relative fat mass (RFM) and chronic kidney disease (CKD): data from NHANES 2005-2018.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Relative Fat Mass and Psoriasis Risk: Evidence from NHANES 2009-2014.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectiveThe Relative Fat Mass (RFM) is an alternative index to body mass index (BMI) for estimating whole body fat percentage (BF%). Our aims were to determine the accuracy of the RFM for 1) identifying individuals with elevated BF% and, 2) estimating the BF% compared to Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in a Chilean adult population. SUBJECTS/
methodsBody composition was assessed by DXA in 270 healthy participants (125 women/145 men). Anthropometric measurements were assessed to calculate RFM and BMI. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were obtained to assess the sensitivity and specificity of both, RFM and BMI. Bland-Altman analysis between BF% measured by DXA vs. predicted BF% derived from RFM was performed to assess validity. Pearson´s correlation coefficients to analyze the association between BMI, RFM and DXA were also calculated.
resultsFor RFM, the cut-off for elevated BF% was ≥22.7% for men and ≥32.4% for women and for BMI was ≥24.4 kg/m
conclusionRFM is an accurate tool for identifying individuals with elevated BF%, although it was not as accurate as DXA for estimating the BF%. RFM may be an alternative method useful in primary care to select individuals for lifestyle counseling and in research to select patients for epidemiological studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38942896What 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.