Assessing the reliability and cross-sectional and longitudinal validity of fifteen bioelectrical impedance analysis devices

Simple item page
dc.creatorSiedler, Madelin R (TTU)
dc.creatorRodriguez, Christian (TTU)
dc.creatorStratton, Matthew T (TTU)
dc.creatorHarty, Patrick S (TTU)
dc.creatorKeith, Dale S (TTU)
dc.creatorGreen, Jacob J (TTU)
dc.creatorBoykin, Jake R (TTU)
dc.creatorWhite, Sarah J (TTU)
dc.creatorWilliams, Abegale D (TTU)
dc.creatorDeHaven, Brielle (TTU)
dc.creatorTinsley, Grant M (TTU)
dc.date.accessioned2023-03-06T19:41:52Z
dc.date.available2023-03-06T19:41:52Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.description© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Nutrition Society. This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.en_US
dc.description.abstractThe purpose of this investigation was to expand upon the limited existing research examining the test–retest reliability, cross-sectional validity and longitudinal validity of a sample of bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) devices as compared with a laboratory four-compartment (4C) model. Seventy-three healthy participants aged 19–50 years were assessed by each of fifteen BIA devices, with resulting body fat percentage estimates compared with a 4C model utilising air displacement plethysmography, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and bioimpedance spectroscopy. A subset of thirty-seven participants returned for a second visit 12–16 weeks later and were included in an analysis of longitudinal validity. The sample of devices included fourteen consumer-grade and one research-grade model in a variety of configurations: hand-to-hand, foot-to-foot and bilateral hand-to-foot (octapolar). BIA devices demonstrated high reliability, with precision error ranging from 0·0 to 0·49 %. Cross-sectional validity varied, with constant error relative to the 4C model ranging from −3·5 (SD 4·1) % to 11·7 (SD 4·7) %, standard error of the estimate values of 3·1–7·5 % and Lin’s concordance correlation coefficients (CCC) of 0·48–0·94. For longitudinal validity, constant error ranged from −0·4 (SD 2·1) % to 1·3 (SD 2·7) %, with standard error of the estimate values of 1·7–2·6 % and Lin’s CCC of 0·37–0·78. While performance varied widely across the sample investigated, select models of BIA devices (particularly octapolar and select foot-to-foot devices) may hold potential utility for the tracking of body composition over time, particularly in contexts in which the purchase or use of a research-grade device is infeasible.en_US
dc.identifier.citationSiedler, M., Rodriguez, C., Stratton, M., Harty, P., Keith, D., Green, J., . . . Tinsley, G. (2022). Assessing the reliability and cross-sectional and longitudinal validity of fifteen bioelectrical impedance analysis devices. British Journal of Nutrition, 1-14. doi:10.1017/S0007114522003749en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1017/S0007114522003749
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2346/91038
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.subjectBioimpedanceen_US
dc.subjectBody compositionen_US
dc.subjectBody faten_US
dc.subjectBioelectrical impedance analysisen_US
dc.titleAssessing the reliability and cross-sectional and longitudinal validity of fifteen bioelectrical impedance analysis devicesen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Siedler_Article.pdf
Size:
1.16 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Main article with TTU Libraries cover page
Download

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.57 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download

Collections

Faculty Research