[go: up one dir, main page]

Golja et al., 2020 - Google Patents

Direct comparison of (anthropometric) methods for the assessment of body composition

Golja et al., 2020

Document ID
12494524515160726228
Author
Golja P
Robič Pikel T
Zdešar Kotnik K
Fležar M
Selak S
Kapus J
Kotnik P
Publication year
Publication venue
Annals of Nutrition and Metabolism

External Links

Snippet

Objective: Several methods for the assessment of body composition exist, yet they yield different results. The present study aimed to assess the extent of these differences on a sample of young, healthy subjects. We hypothesised that differences in body composition …
Continue reading at karger.com (other versions)

Classifications

    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
    • A61B—DIAGNOSIS; SURGERY; IDENTIFICATION
    • A61B5/00—Detecting, measuring or recording for diagnostic purposes; Identification of persons
    • A61B5/48—Other medical applications
    • A61B5/4869—Determining body composition
    • A61B5/4872—Body fat
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
    • A61B—DIAGNOSIS; SURGERY; IDENTIFICATION
    • A61B5/00—Detecting, measuring or recording for diagnostic purposes; Identification of persons
    • A61B5/05—Detecting, measuring or recording for diagnosis by means of electric currents or magnetic fields; Measuring using microwaves or radiowaves
    • A61B5/053—Measuring electrical impedance or conductance of a portion of the body
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
    • A61B—DIAGNOSIS; SURGERY; IDENTIFICATION
    • A61B5/00—Detecting, measuring or recording for diagnostic purposes; Identification of persons
    • A61B5/45—For evaluating or diagnosing the musculoskeletal system or teeth
    • A61B5/4528—Joints
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
    • A61B—DIAGNOSIS; SURGERY; IDENTIFICATION
    • A61B5/00—Detecting, measuring or recording for diagnostic purposes; Identification of persons
    • A61B5/103—Detecting, measuring or recording devices for testing the shape, pattern, colour, size or movement of the body or parts thereof, for diagnostic purposes
    • A61B5/107—Measuring physical dimensions, e.g. size of the entire body or parts thereof
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
    • A61B—DIAGNOSIS; SURGERY; IDENTIFICATION
    • A61B5/00—Detecting, measuring or recording for diagnostic purposes; Identification of persons
    • A61B5/45—For evaluating or diagnosing the musculoskeletal system or teeth
    • A61B5/4538—Evaluating a particular part of the muscoloskeletal system or a particular medical condition
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
    • A61B—DIAGNOSIS; SURGERY; IDENTIFICATION
    • A61B5/00—Detecting, measuring or recording for diagnostic purposes; Identification of persons
    • A61B5/22—Ergometry; Measuring muscular strength or the force of a muscular blow
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G01—MEASURING; TESTING
    • G01N—INVESTIGATING OR ANALYSING MATERIALS BY DETERMINING THEIR CHEMICAL OR PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
    • G01N33/00—Investigating or analysing materials by specific methods not covered by the preceding groups
    • G01N33/48—Investigating or analysing materials by specific methods not covered by the preceding groups biological material, e.g. blood, urine; Haemocytometers
    • G01N33/50—Chemical analysis of biological material, e.g. blood, urine; Testing involving biospecific ligand binding methods; Immunological testing
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A61—MEDICAL OR VETERINARY SCIENCE; HYGIENE
    • A61B—DIAGNOSIS; SURGERY; IDENTIFICATION
    • A61B6/00—Apparatus for radiation diagnosis, e.g. combined with radiation therapy equipment
    • A61B6/48—Diagnostic techniques

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
Schubert et al. Reliability and validity of various laboratory methods of body composition assessment in young adults
Fornetti et al. Reliability and validity of body composition measures in female athletes
Toro-Ramos et al. Body composition during fetal development and infancy through the age of 5 years
Miller et al. Validating InBody® 570 multi-frequency bioelectrical impedance analyzer versus DXA for body fat percentage analysis
Bredella et al. Comparison of DXA and CT in the assessment of body composition in premenopausal women with obesity and anorexia nervosa
Bross et al. Comparing body composition assessment tests in long-term hemodialysis patients
Malá et al. Fitness assessment. Body composition
Nickerson et al. Agreement between 2 segmental bioimpedance devices, BOD POD, and DXA in obese adults
Moore et al. Segmental body composition evaluation by bioelectrical impedance analysis and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry: quantifying agreement between methods
Goldfield et al. Validity of foot-to-foot bioelectrical impedance analysis in overweight and obese children and parents
Jakicic et al. Objective versus self-reported physical activity in overweight and obese young adults
Golja et al. Direct comparison of (anthropometric) methods for the assessment of body composition
Gatterer et al. Assessment of human body composition methods and limitations
Frost et al. Limitations of body mass index for counseling individuals with unilateral lower extremity amputation
Tanaka et al. Waist circumference measured by bioelectrical impedance analysis is interchangeable with manual measurement: increased waist circumference is associated with locomotive syndrome risk
Lee et al. A comparative study on the reliability and validity of body composition results by impedance method measurement device
Patil et al. Estimation of bone mineral content from bioelectrical impedance analysis in Indian adults aged 23–81 years: A comparison with dual energy X-ray absorptiometry
Carvalho et al. Agreement between anthropometric and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry assessments of lower-limb volumes and composition estimates in youth-club rugby athletes
Nickerson et al. Evaluation of a rapid four-compartment model and stand-alone methods in hispanic adults
Goosey-Tolfrey et al. Tracking within-athlete changes in whole-body fat percentage in wheelchair athletes
Lukaski Evaluation of body composition: why and how?
Herberts et al. Protocol standardization may improve precision error of InBody 720 body composition analysis
Dobroch et al. Body composition measurements in paediatrics–a review. Part 1
Tauber et al. Comparison of multi-frequency bioelectrical impedance and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry to assess body composition in college-aged adults
Bridge et al. Prediction of appendicular skeletal and fat mass in children: excellent concordance of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and magnetic resonance imaging