The validity of visual estimations of percent body fat in lean males

Joan Eckerson, Terry J. Housh, Glen O. Johnson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The present study compared the validity of visual estimations of percent fat (% fat) in lean males (X ± SD = 9.6 ± 2.3 % fat) to the validity of bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) and skinfold equations. Thirty five Caucasian male volunteers (X ± SD = 23 ± 5 yr;range = 19-40) served as subjects. Visual estimations of % fat were performed by two experienced male raters. The validity (compared to underwater weighing) for each procedure was determined by examining the constant error (CE), standard error of the estimate (SEE), r, and total error (TE). The results indicated that rater 1 (TE = 2.3% fat) could visually estimate % fat as accurately as the skinfold equations (TE = 2.4% fat). However, based on low TE, SEE, and CE values as well as considerable variability (mean difference = 2.7% fat) between the % fat estimates of the two raters, skinfold equations are recommended over visual inspection and BIA (TE = 5.0% fat) for estimating % fat in lean males.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)615-618
Number of pages4
JournalMedicine and Science in Sports and Exercise
Volume24
Issue number5
StatePublished - 1992
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Adipose Tissue
Fats
Electric Impedance
Volunteers

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
  • Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

The validity of visual estimations of percent body fat in lean males. / Eckerson, Joan; Housh, Terry J.; Johnson, Glen O.

In: Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, Vol. 24, No. 5, 1992, p. 615-618.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{859af25f1bae44a590663d498b1c11a7,
title = "The validity of visual estimations of percent body fat in lean males",
abstract = "The present study compared the validity of visual estimations of percent fat ({\%} fat) in lean males (X ± SD = 9.6 ± 2.3 {\%} fat) to the validity of bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) and skinfold equations. Thirty five Caucasian male volunteers (X ± SD = 23 ± 5 yr;range = 19-40) served as subjects. Visual estimations of {\%} fat were performed by two experienced male raters. The validity (compared to underwater weighing) for each procedure was determined by examining the constant error (CE), standard error of the estimate (SEE), r, and total error (TE). The results indicated that rater 1 (TE = 2.3{\%} fat) could visually estimate {\%} fat as accurately as the skinfold equations (TE = 2.4{\%} fat). However, based on low TE, SEE, and CE values as well as considerable variability (mean difference = 2.7{\%} fat) between the {\%} fat estimates of the two raters, skinfold equations are recommended over visual inspection and BIA (TE = 5.0{\%} fat) for estimating {\%} fat in lean males.",
author = "Joan Eckerson and Housh, {Terry J.} and Johnson, {Glen O.}",
year = "1992",
language = "English",
volume = "24",
pages = "615--618",
journal = "Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise",
issn = "0195-9131",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The validity of visual estimations of percent body fat in lean males

AU - Eckerson, Joan

AU - Housh, Terry J.

AU - Johnson, Glen O.

PY - 1992

Y1 - 1992

N2 - The present study compared the validity of visual estimations of percent fat (% fat) in lean males (X ± SD = 9.6 ± 2.3 % fat) to the validity of bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) and skinfold equations. Thirty five Caucasian male volunteers (X ± SD = 23 ± 5 yr;range = 19-40) served as subjects. Visual estimations of % fat were performed by two experienced male raters. The validity (compared to underwater weighing) for each procedure was determined by examining the constant error (CE), standard error of the estimate (SEE), r, and total error (TE). The results indicated that rater 1 (TE = 2.3% fat) could visually estimate % fat as accurately as the skinfold equations (TE = 2.4% fat). However, based on low TE, SEE, and CE values as well as considerable variability (mean difference = 2.7% fat) between the % fat estimates of the two raters, skinfold equations are recommended over visual inspection and BIA (TE = 5.0% fat) for estimating % fat in lean males.

AB - The present study compared the validity of visual estimations of percent fat (% fat) in lean males (X ± SD = 9.6 ± 2.3 % fat) to the validity of bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) and skinfold equations. Thirty five Caucasian male volunteers (X ± SD = 23 ± 5 yr;range = 19-40) served as subjects. Visual estimations of % fat were performed by two experienced male raters. The validity (compared to underwater weighing) for each procedure was determined by examining the constant error (CE), standard error of the estimate (SEE), r, and total error (TE). The results indicated that rater 1 (TE = 2.3% fat) could visually estimate % fat as accurately as the skinfold equations (TE = 2.4% fat). However, based on low TE, SEE, and CE values as well as considerable variability (mean difference = 2.7% fat) between the % fat estimates of the two raters, skinfold equations are recommended over visual inspection and BIA (TE = 5.0% fat) for estimating % fat in lean males.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0026585017&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0026585017&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 24

SP - 615

EP - 618

JO - Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise

JF - Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise

SN - 0195-9131

IS - 5

ER -