Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42458225›Full record

ReviewNutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition2026

Future of CT body composition research: Methodological discrepancies and advances.

Cecily A Byrne, Sandra L Gomez

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Cecily A ByrnePreviously with the Cancer Health Education and Career Development Program, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8130-5927
Sandra L GomezDepartment of Clinical Nutrition, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3600-0179

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Body composition research utilizing computed tomography (CT) has increased over the past several decades as researchers use clinically acquired CT for opportunistic screening or the identification of phenotypes such as sarcopenia, myosteatosis, and sarcopenic obesity associated with various clinical outcomes. While there continues to be exciting work being done in CT body composition research, including the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to streamline the assessment of body composition, fundamental methodological discrepancies continue to hinder clinical integration. In this narrative review of studies published between 2022 and 2025, we describe newer approaches to normalize skeletal muscle measurements for differences in body size. We provide an overview of the heterogeneity in deriving currently published CT reference criteria for body composition quantity and quality in a limited subset of studies from published literature. We also summarize currently published thresholds from a limited subset of studies, including those most commonly cited, applied to define low muscle quantity or poor muscle composition and compare and contrast these values, as well as their derivation. Finally, we highlight emerging areas utilizing AI technologies and the integration of CT body composition assessment into clinical practice, and on the flip side, the lack of guidance on how this information will be implemented to achieve personalized nutrition care and improve clinical outcomes.

Indexed as

Body CompositionTomography, X-Ray ComputedArtificial IntelligenceHumansMuscle, SkeletalSarcopeniabody composition researchcomputed tomographylow muscle quantitymethodological discrepanciesnarrative reviewpoor muscle composition

Identifiers

PMID42458225
PMCPMC13419016

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.