ArticleEuropean journal of clinical nutrition2025
Novel comparative analysis and equation development for body volume estimation using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry in athletes.
Article in European journal of clinical nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- What is measured and what is estimated in body composition? A clarification framework for terminology and interpretation.Reviews in endocrine & metabolic disorders · 2026Review
- Exploratory approach to speculate on body composition models for elite teenage basketball players.Scientific reports · 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/
objectivesDual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) has been suggested as an alternative method for estimating body volume (BV), a component of the reference four-compartment body composition model. This study reports the development and validation of DXA-BV
methodsA sample of 332 athletes (36.7% females) from several sports were randomly assigned to either the development (n = 232) or cross-validation group (n = 100). DXA-BV
resultsDXA-BV
conclusionWe conducted the first comparative analysis of both empirical and theoretical BV estimation methods using DXA, demonstrating the validity of DXA-BV
Indexed as
Identifiers
40119135What 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.