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 3.

Comparison of body composition values between multi-frequency bioelectrical impedance and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry for males (n = 84).

95% Limits of Agreement
Value (Mean ± SD) d ICC R2 SEE CE ± 1.96 SD Upper Lower Trend
DXA BF% 25.19 ± 7.42 ---
InBody BF% 22.02 ± 7.33 1.12 0.92 0.86 2.81 −3.17 ± 5.53 2.16 −8.70 −0.04
DXA FM 20.67 ± 8.96 ---
InBody FM 18.81 ± 8.90 0.80 0.97 0.93 2.32 −1.86 ± 4.55 2.69 −6.41 −0.02
DXA FFM 61.81 ± 9.18 ---
InBody FFM 63.36 ± 8.95 0.66 0.98 0.94 2.34 1.55 ± 4.57 6.12 −3.02 −0.10

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