PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 12, 2026Clinical Nutrition ESPEN0 citationsOpen Access

Precision, least significant change and validity of body composition estimates from bioelectrical impedance analysis, 3D-optical scanning, and dual X-ray absorptiometry

View Full Paper
COChristopher J. OliverDVDr Luke Del VecchioMCMike Climstein

Key Points

  • Assess the precision and validity of body composition estimates from BIA, 3D scanning, and DXA.
  • Compared body composition outcomes from BIA, 3D scanning, and DXA
  • Evaluated precision and validity of measurements
  • Analyzed interchangeability of devices at the individual level
  • BIA and 3D scanning showed acceptable precision for whole-body outcomes
  • Measurements from BIA and 3D scanning are not interchangeable with DXA
  • Findings highlight limitations of using BIA or 3D scanning in place of DXA in practice

Abstract

BIA and 3DS exhibited acceptable precision for most whole-body 2C outcomes, yet measurements were not interchangeable with DXA at the individual level. These findings caution against applying cross-device normative data or clinical cut-points and underscore the limitations of substituting BIA or 3DS for DXA in general practice.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Oliver et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/698d6d445be6419ac0d52286https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnesp.2026.102959
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper