Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) is a widely used technique in clinical and research settings because it provides non-invasive estimates of body composition. However, the quality of a measurement depends on more than the perceived accuracy and precision of numbers produced by a BIA device. This review considers BIA through the lens of metrology, defined as the science of measurement. It highlights several key factors that affect measurement quality. These include accuracy, precision, calibration, standardisation, and uncertainty quantification, all of which are essential for meaningful, clinically feasible BIA measurements. Applying prediction equations generated by the device outside their intended context, poor electrode placement, or uncalibrated devices can introduce bias, whereas biological variability can complicate the interpretation of bioimpedance results. The traditional emphasis on using a reference method for validation is considered along with clinical relevance, which is argued to be an equally important benchmark for evaluating measurement utility. We also present best practices and practical guidelines for improving measurement quality, interpretation, and integration into clinical workflows. By adopting a metrological mindset in clinical practice and treating BIA with the same rigour as other diagnostic tools, its utility in areas such as fluid management, nutrition, and preventive health can be further enhanced. Trustworthy decisions depend not only on the data itself but also on how it is measured, interpreted, and used.
Brantlov et al. (Wed,) studied this question.