2023-09-112023-09-112023McCarthy, C., Tinsley, G.M., Bosy-Westphal, A., Muller, M.J., Shepherd, J., Gallagher, D., & Heymsfield, S.B.. 2023. Publisher Correction: Total and regional appendicular skeletal muscle mass prediction from dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry body composition models (Scientific Reports, (2023), 13, 1, (2590), 10.1038/s41598-023-29827-y). Scientific Reports, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-39896-8https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-39896-8https://hdl.handle.net/2346/95975© 2023, Springer Nature Limited. cc-byCorrection to: Scientific Reports, published online 14 February 2023 The original version of this Article contained errors. In Figures 2 and 3, the labels and text did not display correctly. The original Figures 2 and 3 and accompanying legends appear below. (Figure presented.) (Figure presented.) Predicted total, arm, and leg skeletal muscle (SM) mass versus corresponding value measured with MRI in the validation sample (n = 47 women; 48 men) on the left (A,C,E) and associated Bland–Altman plots on the right (B,D,F). The regression equations, lines, R2s, and 95% limits of agreement (LOA) are shown in the figures. The statistical significance of each panel is summarized in the text. Total skeletal muscle (SM) mass predicted by Kim’s equation8 versus SM measured with MRI at Kiel (A) and corresponding Bland–Altman plot (B) (n = 475). Total body skeletal muscle (SM) mass predicted by the newly developed Kiel equation versus SM measured with MRI by Kim et al.8 (C) and corresponding Bland–Altman plot (D) (n = 270). The lines of identity (thin solid line), regression equations and lines (solid lines with gray shading indicating 95% CI), and R2s are shown in (A,C). The regression lines with 95% CI and 95% limits of agreement (LOA) (dashed lines) are shown in (B,D). Statistical significance of each panel is summarized in the text. The original Article has been corrected.engErratum