Profile and Reference Values for Body Fat and Skeletal Muscle Mass Percent at Females, Aged from 18.0 to 69.9, Measured by Multichannel Segmental Bioimpedance Method: Serbian Population Study
SUMMARY: Profile and standards for the diagnostics of percent of body fat and muscles were defined on a sample of 1924 women from the Republic of Serbia, aged 18.0 to 69.9, where the body structure of subjects was measured by applying multichannel segmental bioimpedance. Total sample was divided int...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Lenguaje: | English |
| Publicado: |
Sociedad Chilena de Anatomía
2019
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | http://www.scielo.cl/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0717-95022019000401286 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | SUMMARY: Profile and standards for the diagnostics of percent of body fat and muscles were defined on a sample of 1924 women from the Republic of Serbia, aged 18.0 to 69.9, where the body structure of subjects was measured by applying multichannel segmental bioimpedance. Total sample was divided into six age groups, for the purpose of the definition of standard with regards to age. When it comes to body fat percentage results have shown that the average value of the total sample was 28.51±9.26 %, and between the range of 23.81 and 39.94 % for age groups 18.0-19.9 yr and 60.0-69.9 yr, respectively. Regression analysis results have shown that the constant of body fat percentage increase by trend of 3.417 % per decade, and that 25.1 % of mutual variance trend was explained by the model, with prediction error of 4.55 %. With regards to the percentage of skeletal muscles in the body, the results have shown that the average value of the total sample was 39.30±5.25 %, and within the range of 42.25 to 32.58 % for age groups 18.0-19.9 yr and 60.0-69.9 yr, respectively. Regression analysis results have shown that the constant of the skeletal muscles decrease by tend of -2.016 % per decade and that the model explained 23.8 % of mutual variance trend with prediction error of 8.08 %. |
|---|