ArticleJournal of electrical bioimpedance2025
Comparative analysis of body composition results of university students obtained using two bioimpedance analyzers.
Article in Journal of electrical bioimpedance, 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.
- Association Between Diet, Sociodemographic Factors, and Body Composition in Students of a Public University in Ecuador.International journal of environmental research and public health · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Body composition is a key health indicator that distinguishes between fat mass and lean mass, factors associated with the risk of metabolic and cardiovascular diseases. Among measurement methods, bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) is widely used, with single- and multi-frequency devices showing differences in performance. Objective: To compare the accuracy of the OMRON Materials and Methods: An observational, cross-sectional, and comparative study was con-ducted with 40 students (20 men, 20 women) from the University of Caldas, without a history of metabolic diseases. Body fat, muscle mass, basal metabolic rate (BMR), and BMI were measured using both devices. Data normality was assessed, and means were compared using the student's t-test (p < 0.05). Results: In women, Biody showed significantly higher values for body fat, muscle mass, and basal metabolic rate compared to Omron (p < 0.05), with no differences in BMI. In men, only muscle mass and basal metabolic rate were significantly higher with Biody (p < 0.05), with no differences in body fat or BMI. Conclusions: Biody showed significantly higher values than Omron for muscle mass and basal metabolic rate. In women, the differences exceeded the acceptable 5% variability, suggesting that multifrequency devices may offer greater consistency. Although no gold standard was used, Omron could be a valid alternative in men.
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.