Evidence Hub

Segmental body composition evaluation by bioelectrical impedance analysis and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry: Quantifying agreement between methods

Moore ML, Benavides ML, Dellinger JR, Adamson BT, Tinsley GM

Clinical nutrition (Edinburgh, Scotland), 2020

179 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Segmental estimates add specificity to body composition evaluation and could potentially have greater health and function implications than whole-body estimates alone. The aim of this study was to quantify the level of agreement between total and segmental fat mass (FM) and lean soft tissue (LST) estimates from dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and single-frequency bioelectrical impedance analysis (SFBIA).

METHODS: Assessments via DXA (GE® Lunar Prodigy) and SFBIA (RJL Systems® Quantum V) were performed in 179 adults (103 F, 76 M; 30% racial/ethnic minorities). Total and segmental FM and LST estimates were compared in the entire sample, females, and males using null hypothesis significance testing (NHST; via paired-samples t-tests), equivalence testing with 5% equivalence regions, Bland-Altman analysis with linear regression, and additional error metrics.

RESULTS: In females and the entire sample, all LST variables except LSTARMS exhibited equivalence between methods, despite statistically significant differences via NHST for most variables. In males, only estimates of LSTTOTAL and appendicular lean soft tissue (ALST) were equivalent between methods. LST variables exhibited minimal proportional bias. All FM variables failed to exhibit equivalence, and most FM variables were underestimated by SFBIA. The magnitude of relative errors for FM generally appeared larger in males than females. Proportional bias was observed for FMLEGS and FMARMS, as well as…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cross-sectional, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause. Reported size: 179 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free