Table 3. Area indices and optimal cut-off values obtained from ROC curve analysis for height, weight, BMI, 15 specified SAT-layers, 4 Compartments, Total SAT, and TBF% of 32 male athletes and 32 male non-athletes.
| Personalparameters | Area index1 | P | Optimal cutoff2 | Sensitivity | Specificity | Correctly classifiedcases | |
| H0: small | H0: large | [mm] | [%] | [%] | |||
| Height (m) | 0.552 | n.s.3 | |||||
| Weight (kg) | 0.527 | – | n.s. | ||||
| BMI (kg/m2) | 0.623 | – | n.s. | 21.9 | 56.3 | 71.9 | 64.1% (41 of 64) |
| TBF% | 0.903 | – | <0.001 | 11.5 | 78.1 | 93.8 | 85.9% (55 of 64) |
| Total SAT9 | 0.914 | – | <0.001 | 51.7 | 93.8 | 78.1 | 85.9% (55 of 64) |
| SAT-Top 4 | |||||||
| Neck | 0.952 | – | <0.001 | 2.3 | 96.9 | 84.4 | 90.6% (58 of 64) |
| Triceps | 0.853 | – | <0.001 | 3.3 | 75.0 | 87.5 | 81.3% (52 of 64) |
| Biceps | 0.901 | – | <0.001 | 2.1 | 87.5 | 81.3 | 84.4% (54 of 64) |
| Upper back | 0.929 | – | <0.001 | 3.0 | 100.0 | 65.6 | 82.8% (53 of 64) |
| Front chest | 0.889 | – | <0.001 | 2.4 | 75.0 | 90.6 | 82.8% (53 of 64) |
| Lateral chest | 0.914 | – | <0.001 | 2.7 | 90.6 | 81.3 | 85.9% (55 of 64) |
| Upper abdomen | 0.882 | – | <0.001 | 4.2 | 96.9 | 68.8 | 82.8% (53 of 64) |
| Lower abdomen | 0.844 | – | <0.001 | 5.2 | 93.8 | 59.4 | 76.6% (49 of 64) |
| Lower back | 0.698 | – | <0.01 | 7.5 | 87.5 | 46.9 | 67.2% (43 of 64) |
| Hip | 0.809 | – | <0.001 | 4.2 | 68.8 | 81.3 | 75.0% (48 of 64) |
| Front thigh | 0.831 | – | <0.001 | 2.5 | 78.1 | 84.4 | 81.3% (52 of 64) |
| Lateral thigh | 0.925 | – | <0.001 | 2.8 | 87.5 | 87.5 | 87.5% (56 of 64) |
| Rear thigh | 0.815 | – | <0.001 | 2.1 | 56.3 | 93.8 | 75.0% (48 of 64) |
| Inner thigh | 0.865 | – | <0.001 | 3.7 | 81.3 | 81.3 | 81.3% (52 of 64) |
| Calf | 0.821 | – | <0.001 | 2.2 | 71.9 | 78.1 | 75.0% (48 of 64) |
| Compartments | |||||||
| Arms5 | 0.907 | – | <0.001 | 5.4 | 87.5 | 81.3 | 84.4% (54 of 64) |
| Trunk6 | 0.960 | – | <0.001 | 15.5 | 84.4 | 96.9 | 90.6% (58 of 64) |
| Abdomen7 | 0.836 | – | <0.001 | 19.8 | 84.4 | 75.0 | 79.7% (51 of 64) |
| Legs8 | 0.910 | – | <0.001 | 8.2 | 93.8 | 78.1 | 85.9% (55 of 64) |
1
There are two possible hypotheses (H0): that either small/large values provide stronger evidence for positivity.
2
Optimal cut-off value estimated by Youden-Index (Youden, 1950).
3
Not significant (p>0.05).
4
SAT thickness of 15 body sites in mm.
5
Body sites biceps+triceps.
6
Body sites front thigh+lateral thigh+rear thigh+inner thigh+calf.
7
Body sites upper abdomen+lower abdomen+lower back+hip.
8
Body sites neck+upper back+lateral chest+front chest.
9
Body sites 1–15.