ArticleRevista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992)2025
Bioelectrical impedance analysis and skinfold thickness for the estimation of body fat: a population-based study in southern Brazil.
Article in Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Bioelectrical impedance analysis in the health field: a still scientifically fragile tool for body composition assessment.Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study was to compare bioelectrical impedance analysis and skinfold measurements for the estimation of body fat in adults.
methodsWe analyzed data from 292 adult participants enrolled in a cross-sectional population-based study. Four skinfold measurements were performed, and body fat percentage was estimated using the Petroski formula. Bioelectrical impedance analysis was performed using a tetrapolar electrical bioimpedance device. The measurements were compared using Student's t-test, Robinson's coefficient of agreement, Cronbach's alpha, and linear regression models (slope and intercept).
resultsThe mean percentage of body fat estimated by skinfold measurements was higher compared to bioelectrical impedance analysis (29.0 vs. 27.9; p<0.001), but the agreement between the methods is good (alpha=0.88; Robinson's coefficient of agreement=0.91). Linear regression models showed a good correlation (r2=0.69). Bland-Altman analysis showed a mean difference of -1.02 (-1.54 vs. -0.50) between the two techniques. The agreement was better in women, those aged 20-39 years, those with a body mass index<25, and those with a waist-to-height ratio<50.
conclusionThe two methods showed a good agreement between the mean values of body fat percentage and can be used in population studies. However, their results should be considered with caution in men, people aged 40 years and older, overweight people, and those with a waist-to-height ratio≥50.
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.