Comparison of predicted body fat percentage from anthropometric methods and from impedance in university students

被引:32
作者
Arroyo, M [1 ]
Rocandio, AM
Ansotegui, L
Herrera, H
Salces, I
Rebato, E
机构
[1] Univ Basque Country, Fac Pharm, Dept Nutr & Food Sci, Vitoria, Spain
[2] Univ Basque Country, Fac Sci, Dept Genet Phys Anthropol & Anim Physiol, Bilbao, Spain
关键词
body fat; bioelectrical impedance analysis; anthropometry; University students;
D O I
10.1079/BJN20041273
中图分类号
R15 [营养卫生、食品卫生]; TS201 [基础科学];
学科分类号
100403 ;
摘要
The objective of the present study was to compare different methods for evaluating body fat percentage (BF%) (anthropometric methods and bioelectrical impedance analysis) in university students. Subjects were 653 healthy students whose mean age, body height, body weight and BMI were 21.1 (sd 2.5) years, 166.0 (sd 8.4) cm, 62.8 (sd 11.0) kg and 22.7 (sd 3.1) kg/m(2), respectively. Results showed that BMI is a poor predictor of body fatness since the sensitivity was low in comparison with the reference method (Siri equation). The lowest values of BF% were obtained using the reference method (Siri equation) (21.8 (sd 6.8) %). The two methods with the highest agreement were Siri and Lean (mean difference, -0.5), followed by Brozek (mean difference, -1.4) and Deurenberg (mean difference, -1.5). The largest mean difference for BF% was between Siri and impedance (-4.5). Although the methods and/or equations used in the present study have been commonly utilised to estimate BF% in young adults, the results must be interpreted with caution in the diagnosis and monitoring of overweight and obesity.
引用
收藏
页码:827 / 832
页数:6
相关论文
共 47 条
  • [1] Body fat of older adult subjects calculated from bioelectric impedance versus anthropometry correlated but did not agree
    Aghdassi, E
    Tam, C
    Liu, B
    McArthur, M
    McGeer, A
    Simor, A
    Allard, JP
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN DIETETIC ASSOCIATION, 2001, 101 (10) : 1209 - 1212
  • [2] [Anonymous], 1995, PHYS STAT UINT ANT
  • [3] [Anonymous], [No title captured]
  • [4] Barbosa AR, 2001, ARCH LATINOAM NUTR, V51, P49
  • [5] STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT
    BLAND, JM
    ALTMAN, DG
    [J]. LANCET, 1986, 1 (8476) : 307 - 310
  • [6] The relationship between body mass index and waist circumference: implications for estimates of the population prevalence of overweight
    Booth, ML
    Hunter, C
    Gore, CJ
    Bauman, A
    Owen, N
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBESITY, 2000, 24 (08) : 1058 - 1061
  • [7] Bray G., 1998, Handbook of Obesity, P31, DOI DOI 10.3109/9781420051452
  • [8] DENSITOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF BODY COMPOSITION REVISION OF SOME QUANTIATIVE ASSUMPTIONS
    BROZEK, J
    ANDERSON, JT
    KEYS, A
    GRANDE, F
    [J]. ANNALS OF THE NEW YORK ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, 1963, 110 (01) : 113 - &
  • [9] Deurenberg P, 1998, INT J OBESITY, V22, P1164, DOI 10.1038/sj/ijo/0800741
  • [10] BODY-MASS INDEX AS A MEASURE OF BODY FATNESS - AGE-SPECIFIC AND SEX-SPECIFIC PREDICTION FORMULAS
    DEURENBERG, P
    WESTSTRATE, JA
    SEIDELL, JC
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF NUTRITION, 1991, 65 (02) : 105 - 114