PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 28, 2026Nutrients1 citationsOpen Access

BMI and Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis: Body Composition Assessment Identifying Elevated Body Fat in Normal-Weight Young Adults

View Full Paper
RNRóbert László NagyBBBence BomberaVRViktor Rekenyi

Key Points

  • This research aims to evaluate how combining BMI with BIA influences the understanding of body fat in normal-weight young adults.
  • Conducted a cross-sectional study involving 285 young adults
  • Classified participants using InBody BIA for BMI and percent body fat (PBF)
  • Assessed dietary habits with a food frequency questionnaire covering eight food groups
  • Performed group comparisons using Mann–Whitney U tests and Cohen’s d effect sizes
  • Used Spearman’s rank correlation for analyzing physical activity relationship with body composition
  • 12.3% of participants had normal BMI but high PBF, indicating missed cases in BMI screening
  • Overall agreement between BMI and PBF was 75.4%
  • Physical activity showed significant correlations with PBF and skeletal muscle mass, but not with BMI
  • Dietary habits had a conflicting relationship with bmi when compared to actual adiposity measurements

Abstract

Background: Body mass index (BMI) is commonly used to assess nutritional status; however, it cannot distinguish between fat and lean tissue. In young adults, this limitation may mask excess adiposity and distort diet–adiposity associations. Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) provides more detailed measures, including percent of body fat (PBF), skeletal muscle mass (SMM), and the visceral fat level. Objectives: To examine how combining BMI with BIA-based classifications of adiposity influences the assessment of diet–body composition associations in young adults. Methods: This cross-sectional study of 285 young adults (median age 18 years, IQR: 18–20) used InBody BIA to classify participants by BMI and PBF. Dietary habits were assessed via food frequency questionnaire covering eight food groups. Group comparisons used Mann–Whitney U tests with Cohen’s d effect sizes; correlations used Spearman’s rank correlation. Results: Thirty-five participants (12.3%) were BMI-Normal but PBF-High (normal BMI with elevated body fat), a phenotype missed by BMI screening; overall BMI-PBF agreement was 75.4%. Physical activity (IPAQ) correlated significantly with body composition markers, PBF (rho = −0.177, p = 0.003) and SMM (rho = +0.186, p = 0.002), but not with BMI (rho = +0.060, p = 0.310). BMI showed an inverse association with self-reported sweets consumption (rho = −0.138, p = 0.020), likely reflecting a reporting bias rather than true intake, as this pattern disappeared when examining actual adiposity (PBF: rho = +0.032, p = 0.591). Conclusions: Combining BIA with BMI may improve the detection of elevated body fat (12.3% prevalence of normal BMI with elevated body fat); BMI-based screening may not identify all individuals with elevated body fat. Physical activity associations support the complementary value of BIA alongside BMI. Apparent diet–BMI associations may be confounded by adiposity misclassification and reporting bias.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Nagy et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69c771198bbfbc51511e102ahttps://doi.org/10.3390/nu18071060
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper