ArticleProceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering2025
Body composition analysis: Single slice vs. volumetric measures.
Article in Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Body composition analysis (BCA) is useful for evaluating nutritional status, general health, and predicting patient outcomes. Computed tomography (CT)-based BCA has become increasingly popular, with research often focusing on single-transaxial-slice measurements at the L3 vertebral level to estimate volumetric tissue properties. This method assumes the same tissue distribution in all transaxial slices across the body, potentially leading to inaccuracies in clinical assessments. This retrospective study investigates the reliability of single-slice BCA compared to volumetric measurements across the torso in a cohort of 237 adults. Using the GA-Net architecture for automatic tissue segmentation, we analyzed tissue distribution at 25 craniocaudal levels. Our results reveal significant variability in tissue distribution, with cross-sectional areas at L3 poorly correlating with 3D tissue volumes. For instance, we observed a visceral adipose tissue (VAT) volume difference of over 2,900 cm
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.