Estimation of body fat from skinfold thicknesses in middle‐aged and older men and women: A multiple component approach

Abstract

The relationship of skinfold thicknesses and body density to body fatness was assessed, and skinfold prediction equations were developed for the estimation of body fatness determined from measures of body density, total body water, and bone mineral in a sample of 91 males and 116 females aged 34-84 years. For a given skinfold thickness, adjustment for individual deviations in the water and bone mineral fractions of the fat-free body assumed constant by traditional body composition models resulted in absolute reductions in overstimates of body fatness from 4.5 to 1.9% in females and from 2.8 to 1.7% in males for every 15 year increase in age. Percentage fat from density, water, and bone was estimated from skinfold thicknesses with SEEs of 2.9% in males and 3.8% in females. When compared to percentage fat from our multicomponent-derived criterion, percentage fat from body density and a two-component model resulted in individual errors ranging from underestimates of 5.6% fat to overestimates of 14.0% fat. The multicomponent prediction equations presented herein should produce more valid estimates of body composition in middle-aged and older men and women than equations based on two-component models. © 1992 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Predicting the resting metabolic rate of young Australian males

“…The resultant increase in the ratio of subjects to independent variables would enhance the generalizability of the equations (Tabachnick & Fidell, 1996). The SEE of 1.9 %BF for the prediction of body fat via the four-compartment criterion body composition model from the sum of seven skinfold thicknesses (see Figure 1) is lower than that of 2.9 %BF reported by Williams et al (1992) for the sum of nine skinfold thicknesses of 91 American males aged 34 ± 84 y. Their coef®cient of determination indicated 80% shared variance between the dependent and independent variables compared with 93% for this study.…”

Use of anthropometric variables to predict relative body fat determined by a four-compartment body composition model

“…Nevertheless, despite considerable face validity, their use in body composition research has been plagued with biologically significant prediction errors (SEEX2.3 % BF; Norton, 1996). Williams et al (1992) reported SEEs of 2.9 and 3.3 % BF for the prediction of body fat using a four-compartment body composition model for 91 American males aged 34-84 y. However, their criterion measure of body composition or dependent variable did not utilise a direct determination of total body BMM, but rather estimated BM density from a combination of appendicular and axial measurements using both single-and dual-photon absorptiometry.…”

“…In addition, they estimated TBW from deuterium-enriched respiratory water samples (compared with saliva samples for this study) and also appeared to make no correction for nonaqueous hydrogen exchange. The Williams et al (1992) equation used the following variables to predict % BF from their multicompartment model: age (y), sum of four individual skinfolds (subscapular, chest, mid-axilla and thigh or triceps, subscapular, abdominal and calf) and square of the latter. Analyses of the current data (n ¼ 79) using a similar protocol selected six rather than four individual skinfold thicknesses, and resulted in an SEE of 2.2 % BF for the prediction of body composition (R 2 ¼ 0.91).…”

“…To our knowledge, only the research by Williams et al (1992) has used a four-compartment model as the criterion measurement for predicting % BF from anthropometric variables. However, their study had a number of limitations including the estimation of bone mineral density from a combination of appendicular and axial measurements using both single and dual photon absorptiometry, which both utilise a decaying radioisotope source; not specifying a correction for nonaqueous hydrogen exchange when measuring TBW by deuterium dilution; and the use of skinfold calipers which were not reported as being dynamically calibrated.…”

Waist circumference is the key risk factor for diabetes in Korean women with history of gestational diabetes

“…Waist circumference (WC) was measured at the level of the umbilicus, and hip circumference (HC) was measured at the level of the greater trochanters. Skin fold thickness (including bicep, tricep, subscapular, and suprailiac region) was measured using Lange skin fold callipers [17].…”