Bibliographic Details
| Title: |
Smartphone derived anthropometrics: Agreement between a commercially available smartphone application and its parent application intended for use at point-of-care |
| Authors: |
Austin J. Graybeal, Caleb F. Brandner, Abby T. Compton, Sydney H. Swafford, Alex Henderson, Ryan Aultman, Anabelle Vallecillo-Bustos, Jon Stavres |
| Source: |
Clinical Nutrition ESPEN. 59:107-112 |
| Publisher Information: |
Elsevier BV, 2024. |
| Publication Year: |
2024 |
| Subject Terms: |
Adult, body composition, Adolescent, Anthropometry, Point-of-Care Systems, body circumference, Life Sciences, smartphone, Young Adult, body far, Body Composition, anthropometrics, Humans, 3D scanning, Smartphone, Waist Circumference, Human and Clinical Nutrition, Nutrition |
| Description: |
Smartphone applications can now automate body composition and anthropometric measurements remotely, prompting applications intended for use at point-of-care to provide commercially available smartphone applications intended for personal use. However, the agreement between such anthropometrics remain unclear.A total of 123 apparently healthy participants (F: 69; M: 54; age: 28.1 ± 11.3; BMI: 26.9 ± 5.9) completed consecutive body composition scans using a 3D smartphone application intended for personal use (MeThreeSixty; MTS) and it stationary counterpart intended for use in practice (Mobile Fit Booth; MFB). Agreement between devices were evaluated using root mean square error (RMSE), Bland-Altman analyses, and linear regression for all measurements, and additional equivalence testing was conducted for all circumference and limb length comparisons.When evaluated against the MFB, MTS significantly overestimated all measurements other than waist circumference (p = 0.670) using paired t-tests. RMSE was 2.5 % for body fat percentage (BF%), 0.64-3.74 cm for all body circumferences, 0.71-2.3 kg for all lean mass estimates, and 126-659 cm2 and 608-4672 cm3 across all body surface area and body volume estimates, respectively. BF% was the only body composition estimate that did not demonstrate proportional bias (p = 0.221). Circumferences of the chest, shoulder, biceps, forearm, and ankle all demonstrated proportional bias (all coefficients: p |
| Document Type: |
Article |
| Language: |
English |
| ISSN: |
2405-4577 |
| DOI: |
10.1016/j.clnesp.2023.11.021 |
| Access URL: |
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38220362 |
| Rights: |
Elsevier TDM |
| Accession Number: |
edsair.doi.dedup.....76db3651ccbbcefcb77c66cd755971d2 |
| Database: |
OpenAIRE |