Proportional bias of multifrequency bioimpedance analysis is larger in Hispanic females than males.
Proportional bias of multifrequency bioimpedance analysis is larger in Hispanic females than males.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.nutres.2022.03.007
复制
发表时间：
2022-07
影响因子：
4.5
通讯作者：
Snarr, Ronald L.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Nickerson, Brett S.;Snarr, Ronald L.
身体组成算法通常使用多种族人群进行验证，而不考虑种族。这可能是有问题的，当使用多频生物阻抗分析（MF-BIA）的西班牙裔。组错误（即，常数误差[CE]），个体误差（即，当使用双能X线吸收测定法（DXA）作为参考方法时，在西班牙裔男性和女性（分别为n = 84和97）中确定了MF-BIA的一致性[LOA]和比例偏倚。由于缺乏西班牙裔的种族特异性阻抗方程，因此假设MF-BIA与DXA相比存在偏倚。对于体脂百分比（BF%），与DXA相比，MF-BIA在样本（−3.17±5.45%）、男性（−3.2±5.5%）和女性（−3.2±5.4%）中显示出相似的CE±95% LOA。然而，女性存在中度比例偏倚（r=0.48）。样本（r=0.22）和男性（r=-0.04）存在轻微至无比例偏倚。关于脂肪量（FM），MF-BIA显示样本的CE±95% LOA值为−1.4±4.2 kg，男性为−1.9±4.6 kg，女性为−0.9±3.6 kg。女性存在强比例偏倚（=0.68），样本存在中度偏倚（r=0.36）。在男性中未观察到比例偏倚（r=-0.02）。对于去脂质量（FFM），当将MF-BIA与DXA进行比较时，与样本（1.2±3.9 kg）和雌性（0.9±3.4 kg）相比，雄性显示出最大CE±95% LOA（1.6±4.6）。样本（r=-0.01）或男性（r=-0.10）不存在比例偏倚。然而，女性表现出中度负偏倚（r=-0.38）。由于观察到的中度到强烈的比例偏差内的身体成分估计，种族特定的算法的需要是必要的，特别是对西班牙裔女性人口。DXA =双能X线吸收测定法; MF-BIA =多频生物阻抗分析; FFM =去脂质量; BF% =体脂百分比; CE =恒定误差;散点图上的中间实线表示CE。虚线表示一致性的上限和下限（± 1.96 SD）。点划线回归线表示比例偏倚。
Body composition algorithms are typically validated using multi-ethnic populations without accounting for ethnicity. This might be problematic when using multi-frequency bioimpedance analysis (MF-BIA) for Hispanics. Group error (i.e., constant error [CE]), individual error (i.e., 95% limits of agreement [LOAs]), and proportional bias of MF-BIA were determined in Hispanic men and women (n = 84 and 97, respectively) when using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) as a reference method. Due to the lack of an ethnic-specific impedance equation for Hispanics, it was hypothesized that MF-BIA would be biased when compared to DXA. For body fat percent (BF%), MF-BIA displayed similar CE±95% LOA for the sample (−3.17±5.45%), males (−3.2±5.5%), and females (−3.2±5.4%) compared to DXA. However, moderate proportional bias was present for females (r=0.48). The sample (r=0.22) and males (r=−0.04) had trivial-to-no proportional bias. Regarding fat mass (FM), MF-BIA exhibited CE±95% LOA values of −1.4±4.2 kg for the sample, −1.9±4.6 kg for males, and −0.9±3.6 kg for females. There was strong proportional bias for females (=0.68) and moderate bias for the sample (r=0.36). No proportional bias was observed for males (r=−0.02). For fat-free mass (FFM), males demonstrated the largest CE±95% LOA (1.6±4.6), compared to the sample (1.2±3.9 kg) and females (0.9±3.4 kg) when MF-BIA was compared to DXA. No proportional biases existed for the sample (r=−0.01) or males (r=−0.10). However, females exhibited a moderate, negative bias (r=−0.38). Due to the observed moderate-to-strong proportional biases within body composition estimates, the need for ethnic-specific algorithms is warranted, particularly for the Hispanic female population. DXA = Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry; MF-BIA = Multi-frequency bioimpedance analysis; FFM = Fat-free mass; BF% = Body fat percentage; CE = Constant Error; The middle solid lines on the scatterplots indicate CE. The dashed lines represent the upper and lower limits of agreement (± 1.96 SD). The dashed-dotted regression lines represent the proportional bias.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
--
作者：
Antonio, Jose;Kenyon, Madaline;Peacock, Corey
通讯作者：
Peacock, Corey
DOI：
10.1152/ajpendo.1999.277.3.e489
发表时间：
1999-09-01
影响因子：
5.1
作者：
Proctor, DN;O'Brien, PC;Nair, KS
通讯作者：
Nair, KS
影响因子：
2.5
作者：
Oldroy, Brian;Treadgold, Laura;Hind, Karen
通讯作者：
Hind, Karen
DOI：
10.1093/gerona/63.8.829
发表时间：
2008-08-01
影响因子：
5.1
作者：
Clark, Brian C.;Manini, Todd M.
通讯作者：
Manini, Todd M.
影响因子：
4.5
作者：
Tinsley, Grant M.
通讯作者：
Tinsley, Grant M.