Afficher la notice abrégée

dc.contributor.authorArias Téllez, María José 
dc.contributor.authorCarrasco, Fernando
dc.contributor.authorEspaña Romero, Vanesa
dc.contributor.authorInostroza, Jorge
dc.contributor.authorBustamante, Alejandro
dc.contributor.authorSolar-Altamirano, Ignacio
dc.date.accessioned2024-11-20T08:23:31Z
dc.date.available2024-11-20T08:23:31Z
dc.date.issued2019-11-20
dc.identifier.citationArias Téllez, M.J. et. al. PLoS ONE 14(11): e0224291. [https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0224291]es_ES
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10481/97120
dc.description.abstractObjective To compare body composition estimations of field estimation methods: Durnin & Womersley anthropometry (DW-ANT), bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) and Deborah-Kerr anthropometry (DK-ANT) against dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in a male Chilean sport climbing sample. Methods 30 adult male climbers of different performance levels participated in the study. A DXA scan (Lunar Prodigy®) was used to determine fat mass, lean mass and total bone mineral content (BMC). Total muscle mass (MM, kg) was estimated through a validated prediction model. DW-ANT and BIA (“non-athletes” and “athletes” equations) were used to determinate fat mass percentage (FM %), while DK-ANT was utilized to estimate MM and BMC. Results A significant (p<0.01) inter-method difference was observed for all methods analyzed. When compared to DXA, DW-ANT and BIA underestimated FM% and DK-ANT overestimated MM and BMC (All p<0.01). The inter-method differences was lower for DW-ANT. Discussion We found that body composition estimation in climbers is highly method dependent. If DXA is not available, DW-ANT for FM% has a lower bias of estimation than BIA in young male Chilean climbers. For MM and BMC, further studies are needed to compare and estimate the DK-ANT bias level. For both methods, correction equations for specific climbing population should be considered.es_ES
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherPLOS ONEes_ES
dc.rightsAtribución 4.0 Internacional*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/*
dc.titleA comparison of body composition assessment methods in climbers: Which is better?es_ES
dc.typejournal articlees_ES
dc.rights.accessRightsopen accesses_ES
dc.identifier.doi10.1371/journal.pone.0224291
dc.type.hasVersionVoRes_ES


Fichier(s) constituant ce document

[PDF]

Ce document figure dans la(les) collection(s) suivante(s)

Afficher la notice abrégée

Atribución 4.0 Internacional
Excepté là où spécifié autrement, la license de ce document est décrite en tant que Atribución 4.0 Internacional