Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorLamb, Kevin L.en
dc.contributor.authorWilliams, Alun G.*
dc.date.accessioned2011-07-06T10:32:01Zen
dc.date.available2011-07-06T10:32:01Zen
dc.date.issued1995-08en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10034/135440en
dc.description.abstractThe present investigation examined the validity of bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) and selected skinfolds (Sum 4) when estimating percent body fat (% fat) in young, physically active adults (MEAN ± SEM = 18.3 ± 1.2 % fat) by comparing the estimates with values obtained from densitometry (D). Thirty-five Caucasian volunteers (21 males, 14 females; MEAN ± SEM = 22.9 ± 0.4 yr) served as subjects. The statistical analysis involved calculation of the bias and 95% limits of agreement. The results indicated that the Bodystat 1500 BIA system agreed better with D (bias and 95% limits = 0.7 ± 7.4 % fat) than Sum 4 (bias and 95% limits = 2.2 ± 8.5 % fat). However, the error observed for both predictive methods was too large to recommend use in assessing % fat in a young, physically active population, unless only a general estimation of % fat is required for work such as epidemiological studies.
dc.description.sponsorshipChester College of Higher Education & CEWTEC.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherUniversity of Liverpool (Chester College of Higher Education)en
dc.subjectbody compositionen
dc.subjectbioelectrical impedance analysisen
dc.subjectskinfoldsen
dc.subjectdensitometryen
dc.subjectagreementen
dc.titleAn investigation into the validity of percentage body fat estimations by a commercially available bioelectrical impedance analyseren
dc.typeThesis or dissertationen
dc.type.qualificationnameMScen
dc.type.qualificationlevelMasters Degreeen
html.description.abstractThe present investigation examined the validity of bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) and selected skinfolds (Sum 4) when estimating percent body fat (% fat) in young, physically active adults (MEAN ± SEM = 18.3 ± 1.2 % fat) by comparing the estimates with values obtained from densitometry (D). Thirty-five Caucasian volunteers (21 males, 14 females; MEAN ± SEM = 22.9 ± 0.4 yr) served as subjects. The statistical analysis involved calculation of the bias and 95% limits of agreement. The results indicated that the Bodystat 1500 BIA system agreed better with D (bias and 95% limits = 0.7 ± 7.4 % fat) than Sum 4 (bias and 95% limits = 2.2 ± 8.5 % fat). However, the error observed for both predictive methods was too large to recommend use in assessing % fat in a young, physically active population, unless only a general estimation of % fat is required for work such as epidemiological studies.


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
alun williams.pdf
Size:
4.700Mb
Format:
PDF
Request:
dissertation

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record