Bioelectrical impedance validation studies: alternative approaches to their interpretation
Bioelectrical impedance validation studies: alternative approaches to their interpretation
复制标题
生物电阻抗验证研究：解释的替代方法
DOI：
10.1038/ejcn.2012.159
复制
发表时间：
2013
影响因子：
4.7
通讯作者：
L. Ward
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
L. Ward
背景/目的：身体成分评估方法的交叉验证需要对两种方法的一致程度进行统计评价。通常，基于阻抗的预测身体成分的方法是通过一致性限制和相关分析与其他方法进行评估的。参考使用生物阻抗谱（BIS）和双能x射线吸收仪（DXA）获得的示例身体成分数据，提出了替代方法。对象/方法：从人体成分数据库中随机抽取数据集，采用一致性限分析和误差网格分析进行分析。结果：bis导出的体脂百分比预测相对于DXA预测的精度可以从一致性分析的限来确定。强调了在这类分析中了解参考方法精度的重要性。误差网格分析有可能以直观易懂的方式帮助解释方法比较数据。结论：在交叉验证研究中，比较其他生物医学研究分支中使用的分析方法的替代方法可能在评估基于阻抗的方法和其他评估身体成分的方法的效用时被证明是有用的。
Background/Objectives:Cross-validation of methods of body composition assessment necessitates statistical evaluation of the degree to which the two methods are in agreement. Typically, impedance-based methods for predicting body composition are assessed against other methods using limits of agreement and correlation analysis. Alternative approaches are presented with reference to example body composition data obtained using bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA).Subjects/Methods:A randomly selected data set, drawn from a body composition database, was analysed by limits of agreement analysis and error grid analysis.Results:The precision of BIS-derived predictions of percentage body fat relative to that of DXA can be determined from limits of agreement analysis. The importance of knowing the precision of the reference method in such analyses was highlighted. Error grid analysis has the potential to aid interpretation of method comparison data in an intuitively understandable way.Conclusions:Alternative ways of comparing analytical methods that are in use in other branches of biomedical research may prove useful when evaluating the utility of impedance-based methods and other methods for the assessment of body composition in cross-validation studies.