Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40957934›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical nutrition2025

Real-world assessment of Multi-Frequency Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis (MFBIA) for measuring body composition in healthy physically active populations.

Adam W Potter, Leigh C Ward, Christopher L Chapman, William J Tharion, David P Looney, Karl E Friedl

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Adam W PotterUnited States Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, Natick, MA, USA. adam.w.potter.civ@health.mil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4980-8353
Leigh C WardSchool of Chemistry and Molecular Biosciences, the University of Queensland, St. Lucia, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2378-279X
Christopher L ChapmanUnited States Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, Natick, MA, USA.
William J TharionUnited States Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, Natick, MA, USA.
David P LooneyUnited States Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, Natick, MA, USA.
Karl E FriedlUnited States Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, Natick, MA, USA.

Funding

United States Department of Defense | Defense Health Agency (DHA) N/A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMulti-frequency bioelectrical impedance analysis (MFBIA) methods offer reliable and moderately accurate estimates of body composition in tightly controlled conditions (prandial and hydration status, recent exercise, time of day).

objectiveThis study examined MFBIA reliability and validity in a real-world environment where these factors were not controlled.

methodsRegional and total body composition estimates by MFBIA (InBody 770) were compared to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in 1000 healthy adults (667 men; 333 women), including fat mass (FM), percent body fat (%BF), fat-free mass (FFM), and visceral adipose tissue (VAT). In subsets, reliability was determined from duplicate MFBIA and DXA obtained within 1 week, and total body water (TBW) was compared to single-frequency BIA (SFBIA).

resultsMFBIA demonstrated modest population-level agreement with DXA for total body FM (men, r = 0.93, bias -3.7 ± 2.6 kg; women, r = 0.96, bias, -1.9 ± 1.8 kg), %BF (men, r = 0.89, bias, -4.2 ± 3.0%; women, r = 0.92, bias, -2.8 ± 2.6%), and FFM (men, r = 0.95, bias, 3.4 ± 2.8 kg; women, r = 0.94, bias, 2.0 ± 2.2 kg). Regional correlations were highest for trunk FM (men, r = 0.92, CCC = 0.86; women r = 0.93, CCC = 0.93) and lowest for VAT (men, r = 0.74, CCC = 0.68; women, r = 0.74, CCC = 0.34). DXA and MFBIA regional and total assessments were highly reliable (DXA, ICC 0.990-0.998) and (MFBIA, ICC 0.987-0.995). TBW by MFBIA and SFBIA showed moderate agreement (men, r = 0.73, bias, -1.89 ± 3.31; women, r = 0.82, bias, -1.74 ± 2.01).

conclusionThis MFBIA system was shown to have high retest reliability and, when compared to laboratory methods, provides a moderately accurate method for measuring TBW and body composition (except for VAT) in uncontrolled conditions.

Indexed as

Body CompositionElectric ImpedanceExerciseAbsorptiometry, PhotonAdipose TissueAdultAgedBody WaterFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID40957934
PMCPMC12678178

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.