Methodologies for establishing and validating cut-points and comparative standards in medical imaging-based body composition analysis: a scoping review protocol.

IF 3.9 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Alanood Aljanahi, Kathryn V Dalrymple, Eirini Dimidi, Erin Stella Sullivan
{"title":"Methodologies for establishing and validating cut-points and comparative standards in medical imaging-based body composition analysis: a scoping review protocol.","authors":"Alanood Aljanahi, Kathryn V Dalrymple, Eirini Dimidi, Erin Stella Sullivan","doi":"10.1186/s13643-026-03096-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Medical imaging-based body composition analysis (BCA) has shown promise in offering detailed, noninvasive assessments of fat, muscle, and bone, but challenges persist in establishing consistent comparative standards. Current studies reveal significant variability in methodologies, which limits comparability and clinical application. This highlights the need for a comprehensive review to explore these methodologies and address the gap in standardisation. The aim of the study is to identify and map the methodologies used in body composition imaging to establish and validate comparative standards (such as cut-points, thresholds, or normative values) and to catalogue the proposed comparative standards.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This scoping review will be conducted following JBI methodology. The following eligibility criteria will be applied: Population: healthy subjects with no major comorbidities or individuals with cancer assessed using body composition imaging (BCI) and concept: methodologies for establishing BCI comparative standards and/or formally validating them against any outcome or other BCA reference standard. This scoping review will consider studies across all clinical settings. There will be no restrictions on the setting or purpose of the original study. Validation studies using BCI as the reference standard will not be included unless the comparative standard being validated is another BCI feature. The electronic databases to be searched are Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Scopus, EBSCOhost CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and IEEE Xplore. Grey literature sources will not be included. Studies published in English will be considered, with no date restrictions applied. Two independent reviewers will screen all titles and abstracts, followed by full-text articles, and will undertake data extraction. Data extracted will be presented in tabular and/or diagrammatic form for comprehensive narrative synthesis.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The scoping review will summarise existing evidence on BCI. It will identify potential methodological gaps, describe current proposed thresholds or normative values, and highlight areas for further research to establish validated cut-points.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>OSF https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/QZMN2.</p>","PeriodicalId":22162,"journal":{"name":"Systematic Reviews","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-026-03096-y","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Medical imaging-based body composition analysis (BCA) has shown promise in offering detailed, noninvasive assessments of fat, muscle, and bone, but challenges persist in establishing consistent comparative standards. Current studies reveal significant variability in methodologies, which limits comparability and clinical application. This highlights the need for a comprehensive review to explore these methodologies and address the gap in standardisation. The aim of the study is to identify and map the methodologies used in body composition imaging to establish and validate comparative standards (such as cut-points, thresholds, or normative values) and to catalogue the proposed comparative standards.

Methods: This scoping review will be conducted following JBI methodology. The following eligibility criteria will be applied: Population: healthy subjects with no major comorbidities or individuals with cancer assessed using body composition imaging (BCI) and concept: methodologies for establishing BCI comparative standards and/or formally validating them against any outcome or other BCA reference standard. This scoping review will consider studies across all clinical settings. There will be no restrictions on the setting or purpose of the original study. Validation studies using BCI as the reference standard will not be included unless the comparative standard being validated is another BCI feature. The electronic databases to be searched are Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Scopus, EBSCOhost CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and IEEE Xplore. Grey literature sources will not be included. Studies published in English will be considered, with no date restrictions applied. Two independent reviewers will screen all titles and abstracts, followed by full-text articles, and will undertake data extraction. Data extracted will be presented in tabular and/or diagrammatic form for comprehensive narrative synthesis.

Discussion: The scoping review will summarise existing evidence on BCI. It will identify potential methodological gaps, describe current proposed thresholds or normative values, and highlight areas for further research to establish validated cut-points.

Systematic review registration: OSF https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/QZMN2.

基于医学成像的身体成分分析中建立和验证切入点和比较标准的方法:范围审查方案。
背景:基于医学成像的身体成分分析(BCA)在提供脂肪、肌肉和骨骼的详细、无创评估方面显示出了希望,但在建立一致的比较标准方面仍然存在挑战。目前的研究表明,方法上存在显著差异,这限制了可比性和临床应用。这突出表明需要进行全面审查,以探索这些方法并解决标准化方面的差距。该研究的目的是确定和绘制用于身体成分成像的方法,以建立和验证比较标准(如切点、阈值或规范性值),并对拟议的比较标准进行编目。方法:本次范围审查将按照JBI方法进行。适用以下资格标准:人群:无主要合并症的健康受试者或使用身体成分成像(BCI)和概念评估的癌症患者:建立BCI比较标准和/或根据任何结果或其他BCA参考标准对其进行正式验证的方法。本次范围审查将考虑所有临床环境下的研究。对原始研究的设置和目的没有任何限制。使用BCI作为参考标准的验证研究将不包括在内,除非被验证的比较标准是另一个BCI特征。检索的电子数据库有:Ovid MEDLINE、Ovid Embase、Scopus、EBSCOhost CINAHL、Web of Science、Cochrane Library、IEEE explore。灰色文献来源将不包括在内。以英文发表的研究将被考虑,没有日期限制。两名独立审稿人将筛选所有标题和摘要,然后是全文文章,并将进行数据提取。提取的数据将以表格和/或图表的形式呈现,以便进行全面的叙述综合。讨论:范围审查将总结脑机接口的现有证据。它将确定潜在的方法差距,描述当前建议的阈值或规范值,并强调需要进一步研究的领域,以建立有效的切入点。系统评审注册:OSF https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/QZMN2。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Systematic Reviews
Systematic Reviews Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
241
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Systematic Reviews encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. The journal publishes high quality systematic review products including systematic review protocols, systematic reviews related to a very broad definition of health, rapid reviews, updates of already completed systematic reviews, and methods research related to the science of systematic reviews, such as decision modelling. At this time Systematic Reviews does not accept reviews of in vitro studies. The journal also aims to ensure that the results of all well-conducted systematic reviews are published, regardless of their outcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书