Table 2.

Validation of the selected BIA- and anthropometry-based predictive equations in the futsal players.

		Regression Analysis		CCC analysis			Agreement Analysis
	Mean ± SD	r2	SEE (kg)	CCC	ρ	Cb	Bias	95% LoA	Trend
FM%DXA	15.6 ± 3.6	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
BIA-based predictive equations
Generalized equations
Lukaski and Bolonchuk [21]	18.3 ± 5.3 *	0.53	2.46	0.641	0.880	0.728	2.69	−4.5; 9.9	r = 0.406; p < 0.001
Sun et al. [22]	16.8 ± 3.9 *	0.57	2.33	0.719	0.757	0.951	1.13	−4.0; 6.3	r = 0.034; p = 0.790
Athletic equations
Matias et al. [25]	15.2 ± 5.1	0.69	1.99	0.774	0.829	0.933	−0.48	−6.2; 5.2	r = 0.451; p < 0.001
Stewart et al. [26]	14.8 ± 4.5	0.53	2.44	0.682	0.729	0.936	−0.80	−7.3; 5.6	r = 0.287; p = 0.020
Sport-specific equations
Matias et al. [29]	15.2 ± 3.2	0.64	2.12	0.799	0.804	0.994	−0.30	−4.5; 3.9	r = −0.217; p = 0.083
Anthropometry-based predictive equations
Generalized equations
Durnin and Womersley [23]	13.6 ± 3.5 *	0.62	2.19	0.670	0.786	0.853	−2.04	−7.3; 5.6	r = −0.138; p = 0.271
Lean et al. [24]	13.9 ± 4.1 *	0.64	2.12	0.716	0.800	0.895	−1.72	−6.6; 3.1	r = 0.357; p = 0.003
Athletic equations
Evans et al. [27]	14.9 ± 5.1	0.70	1.93	0.774	0.838	0.925	−0.67	−6.3; 5.0	r = 0.646; p < 0.001
Withers et al. [28]	15.1 ± 3.9	0.62	2.16	0.778	0.792	0.932	−0.55	−5.3; 4.2	r = 0.279; p = 0.023
Sport-specific equations
Giro et al. [30]	15.9 ± 3.2	0.81	1.58	0.890	0.900	0.988	0.33	−2.7; 3.4	r = 0.235; p = 0.057

Note: r², coefficient of determination; SEE, standard error of estimation; CCC, concordance correlation coefficient; ρ, precision; Cb, accuracy; LoA, limits of agreement; r, coefficient of correlation; BIA, bioelectrical impedance analysis; DXA, dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. * = Significant differences from DXA (p < 0.05).