P. Abdalla, L. Bohn, A. P. Santos, Leonardo Santos Lopes da Silva, M. Tasinafo, A. C. R. Venturini, N. Ramos, P. M. Pardo, J. Mota, D. Machado
{"title":"巴西老年妇女阑尾肌质量的20个人体测量预测方程的交叉验证:一项横断面研究","authors":"P. Abdalla, L. Bohn, A. P. Santos, Leonardo Santos Lopes da Silva, M. Tasinafo, A. C. R. Venturini, N. Ramos, P. M. Pardo, J. Mota, D. Machado","doi":"10.53886/gga.e0220034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To test the cross-validation of anthropometric prediction equations for appendicular muscle mass (AMM) in older Brazilian women. Methods: Sixty-seven older women (69.84 ± 5.95 years old) underwent anthropometric measurements. AMM (kg) reference values obtained by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (AMMDXA) were compared to 20 anthropometric equations for estimating AMM in older adults. A paired t-test (p > 0.05), standard error of estimate (SEE < 3.50 kg), and r2 > 0.70 confirmed the validity of the equations. The agreement between predictions and the reference was also verified (Bland-Altman). Results: Four American equations and one Mexican equation were not statistically different from AMMDXA (p > 0.05) but did not present suitable r2 values for validation. The American equation from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), AMM (kg) = (-0.04 × age [years]) + (0.46 × calf circumference [cm]) + (0.32 × arm circumference [cm]) + (0.11 × thigh circumference [cm]) – (0.27 × body mass index [BMI, kg/m2]) + (0.07 × waist circumference [cm]) – 13 119) showed the best performance (r2 = 0.64; SEE = 3.24 kg), with minimal mean difference (0.26 kg), no heteroscedasticity for extreme values, and with high agreement with the Brazilian sample (-3.90 to 3.40 kg). Conclusion: When specific equations for a given population are not available, the use of generic equations of greater sample representativeness with scientifically and reliably analyzed data is allowed.","PeriodicalId":52782,"journal":{"name":"Geriatrics Gerontology and Aging","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cross-validation of 20 anthropometric prediction equations for appendicular muscle mass in older Brazilian women: a cross-sectional study\",\"authors\":\"P. Abdalla, L. Bohn, A. P. Santos, Leonardo Santos Lopes da Silva, M. Tasinafo, A. C. R. Venturini, N. Ramos, P. M. Pardo, J. Mota, D. Machado\",\"doi\":\"10.53886/gga.e0220034\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective: To test the cross-validation of anthropometric prediction equations for appendicular muscle mass (AMM) in older Brazilian women. Methods: Sixty-seven older women (69.84 ± 5.95 years old) underwent anthropometric measurements. AMM (kg) reference values obtained by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (AMMDXA) were compared to 20 anthropometric equations for estimating AMM in older adults. A paired t-test (p > 0.05), standard error of estimate (SEE < 3.50 kg), and r2 > 0.70 confirmed the validity of the equations. The agreement between predictions and the reference was also verified (Bland-Altman). Results: Four American equations and one Mexican equation were not statistically different from AMMDXA (p > 0.05) but did not present suitable r2 values for validation. The American equation from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), AMM (kg) = (-0.04 × age [years]) + (0.46 × calf circumference [cm]) + (0.32 × arm circumference [cm]) + (0.11 × thigh circumference [cm]) – (0.27 × body mass index [BMI, kg/m2]) + (0.07 × waist circumference [cm]) – 13 119) showed the best performance (r2 = 0.64; SEE = 3.24 kg), with minimal mean difference (0.26 kg), no heteroscedasticity for extreme values, and with high agreement with the Brazilian sample (-3.90 to 3.40 kg). Conclusion: When specific equations for a given population are not available, the use of generic equations of greater sample representativeness with scientifically and reliably analyzed data is allowed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Geriatrics Gerontology and Aging\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Geriatrics Gerontology and Aging\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.53886/gga.e0220034\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geriatrics Gerontology and Aging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53886/gga.e0220034","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Cross-validation of 20 anthropometric prediction equations for appendicular muscle mass in older Brazilian women: a cross-sectional study
Objective: To test the cross-validation of anthropometric prediction equations for appendicular muscle mass (AMM) in older Brazilian women. Methods: Sixty-seven older women (69.84 ± 5.95 years old) underwent anthropometric measurements. AMM (kg) reference values obtained by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (AMMDXA) were compared to 20 anthropometric equations for estimating AMM in older adults. A paired t-test (p > 0.05), standard error of estimate (SEE < 3.50 kg), and r2 > 0.70 confirmed the validity of the equations. The agreement between predictions and the reference was also verified (Bland-Altman). Results: Four American equations and one Mexican equation were not statistically different from AMMDXA (p > 0.05) but did not present suitable r2 values for validation. The American equation from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), AMM (kg) = (-0.04 × age [years]) + (0.46 × calf circumference [cm]) + (0.32 × arm circumference [cm]) + (0.11 × thigh circumference [cm]) – (0.27 × body mass index [BMI, kg/m2]) + (0.07 × waist circumference [cm]) – 13 119) showed the best performance (r2 = 0.64; SEE = 3.24 kg), with minimal mean difference (0.26 kg), no heteroscedasticity for extreme values, and with high agreement with the Brazilian sample (-3.90 to 3.40 kg). Conclusion: When specific equations for a given population are not available, the use of generic equations of greater sample representativeness with scientifically and reliably analyzed data is allowed.