The influence of body build on estimates of body composition from anthropometric measurements in premenopausal women

Rutishauser, I. H. E., Pasco, J. A. and Wheeler, C. E. 1995, The influence of body build on estimates of body composition from anthropometric measurements in premenopausal women, European journal of clinical nutrition, vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 248-255.

Attached Files
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads

Title The influence of body build on estimates of body composition from anthropometric measurements in premenopausal women
Author(s) Rutishauser, I. H. E.
Pasco, J. A.
Wheeler, C. E.
Journal name European journal of clinical nutrition
Volume number 49
Issue number 4
Start page 248
End page 255
Total pages 8
Publisher John Libbey & Co.
Place of publication London, England
Publication date 1995
ISSN 0954-3007
Keyword(s) anthropometry
body fat
body mass index
dual energy X-ray absorptiometry
female
impedance
premenopausal
skinfolds
Summary Objective: To assess the influence of body build on the bias and limits of agreement for estimates of body fat obtained from anthropometric prediction equations when compared with the same data obtained by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA).

Survey design and subjects:
Ninety-one premenopausal women, aged between 20 and 54 years, were chosen to represent a range of skeletal body build (relative silting height 0.50-0.56) and body fatness [body mass index (BMI) 18-34 kg/m2]. Measurements of weight, sitting height, stature, skinfold thickness, waist, umbilical and hip circumference and total body resistance and reactance were made on all subjects by standard techniques after an overnight fast. A DEXA measurement of total body fat, fat-free soft tissue and total body bone mineral mass was also obtained within 2 weeks of the anthropometric assessment.

Results:
At the group level the mean difference (bias) between DEXA and the anthropometric estimates of body fat was similar for all three anthropometric estimates ranging from 2.7 kg with impedance to 1.8 kg with skinfold thickness. The 95% limits of agreement were also similar, ranging from ±5.3 kg with body mass index to ±4.1 kg with impedance. Umbilical circumference, BMI and the amount of bone mineral expressed as a proportion of the fat-free soft-tissue mass were all significantly (P < 0.01) correlated with the level of bias between DEXA and the anthropometric estimates of body fat. This was not the case for relative sitting height or measures of body fat distribution. Regression equations which included BMI or umbilical circumference in combination with the predicted estimates of body fat essentially eliminated the association between the level of bias in predicted body fat and the level of body fatness. They also reduced the 95% limits of agreement between DEXA and the anthropometric estimates of body fat.

Conclusions:
Using DEXA estimates of body fat as the standard of reference our results suggest that the comparability and precision of body fat estimates derived from age- and/or sex-specific anthropometric prediction equations based on skinfolds and BMI, but not impedance, can be improved by adjusting for differences in BMI and umbilical circumference respectively.
Language eng
Field of Research 119999 Medical and Health Sciences not elsewhere classified
Socio Economic Objective 970111 Expanding Knowledge in the Medical and Health Sciences
HERDC Research category C1.1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal
Copyright notice ©1995, Elsevier
Persistent URL http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30042830

Document type: Journal Article
Collection: School of Medicine
Connect to link resolver
 
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.

Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 5 times in TR Web of Science
Scopus Citation Count Cited 5 times in Scopus
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 30 Abstract Views, 0 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Mon, 05 Mar 2012, 11:17:21 EST

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.