Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2023 Jul 1.
Published in final edited form as: Nutr Res. 2022 Mar 26;103:40–46. doi: 10.1016/j.nutres.2022.03.007

Table 2.

Comparison of body composition values between multi-frequency bioelectrical impedance and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry for females (n = 97).

95% Limits of Agreement
Value (Mean ± SD) d ICC R2 SEE CE ± 1.96 SD Upper Lower Trend
DXABF% 34.63 ± 8.03 ---
InBody BF% 31.47 ± 9.35 1.15 0.94 0.92 2.23 −3.16 ± 5.41 2.25 −8.57 0.48
DXA FM 22.61 ± 10.75 ---
InBody FM 21.64 ± 12.01 0.53 0.97 0.98 1.28 −0.98 ± 3.61 2.63 −4.59 0.68
DXA FFM 42.56 ± 6.84 ---
InBody FFM 43.50 ± 6.20 0.55 0.98 0.94 1.66 0.94 ± 3.35 4.29 −2.41 −0.38

DXA = Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry; InBody 570 = Multi-frequency bioelectrical impedance; BF% = body fat percentage; FFM = fat-free mass; SEE = standard error of estimate; CE = constant error.