| Literature DB >> 19220892 |
David G Levitt1, Steven B Heymsfield, Richard N Pierson, Sue A Shapses, John G Kral.
Abstract
Correction to Levitt DG, Heymsfield SB, Pierson Jr RN, Shapses SA, Kral JG: Physiological models of body composition and human obesity. Nutrition & Metabolism 2007, 4:19.Entities:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19220892 PMCID: PMC2649131 DOI: 10.1186/1743-7075-6-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutr Metab (Lond) ISSN: 1743-7075 Impact factor: 4.169
Caucasian males: Dependence of fat fraction on age for two BMI ranges.
| BMI Range | Ave age (SD) | Age range | Ave BMI | Ave Fat Fraction | N |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18 – 24 | 21.86 (2.44) | 18 – 25 | 22.19 (1.08) | 0.1193 (.046) | 29 |
| 29.94 (2.36) | 26 – 33 | 22.12 (1.34) | 0.134 (.048) (NS) | 32 | |
| 52.83 (19.42) | 34 – 84 | 22.39 (1.31) | 0.173 (.057) (p < .01) | 30 | |
| 24 – 44 | 25.94 (2.66) | 21 – 30 | 27.64 (4.00) | 0.188 (.084) | 47 |
| 38.17 (5.07) | 31 – 48 | 27.42 (3.96) | 0.211 (.072) (NS) | 48 | |
| 66.25 (10.69) | 49 – 97 | 27.93 (3.41) | 0.284 (.075) (p < .01) | 47 | |
The p values are for comparisons to the closest younger age group.
Caucasian females: Dependence of fat fraction on age for three BMI ranges.
| BMI Range | Ave age (SD) | Age range | Ave BMI | Ave Fat Fraction | N |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17 – 22 | 24.95 (3.41) | 18 – 30 | 20.00 (1.38) | 0.219 (.045) | 42 |
| 38.04 (5.87) | 30 – 49 | 20.60 (1.07) | 0.241 (.056) (p < .05) | 42 | |
| 63.32 (11.18) | 49 – 89 | 20.55 (1.01) | 0.298 (.053) (p < .01) | 40 | |
| 22 – 25.9 | 26.14 (4.72) | 18 – 33 | 23.30 (1.03) | 0.26 (.049) | 43 |
| 39.12 (4.91) | 33 – 51 | 23.45 (1.05) | 0.30 (.055) (p < .01) | 41 | |
| 68.12 (10.47) | 52 – 88 | 24.12 (1.15) | 0.36 (.059) (p < .01) | 39 | |
| 26 – 56 | 34.94 (6.198) | 21 – 45 | 31.19 (6.12) | 0.408 (.074) | 36 |
| 54.0 (4.69) | 46 – 61 | 31.72 (5.89) | .428 (.056) (NS) | 35 | |
| 70.49 (6.87) | 62 – 90 | 29.36 (2.68) | 0.414 (.053) (NS) | 35 | |
The p values are for comparisons to the closest younger age group
Ethnic dependence of BMI versus fat fraction for males.
| N | Age range (ave) | BMI range (ave) | Ave Fat Fract. (SD) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Caucasian | 129 | 20 – 57 (37.4) | 22 – 34 (25.42) | 0.321 (0.071) |
| Black | 95 | 20 – 52 (37.8) | 20 – 34 (26.57) | 0.328 (0.074) (NS) |
| Hispanic | 37 | 20 – 60 (36.1) | 20 – 34 (25.40) | 0.311 (0.09) (NS) |
| Puerto Rican | 41 | 20 – 52 (35.7) | 20 – 30 (26.18) | 0.348 (0.058) (p < .05) |
| Caucasian | 153 | 23 – 53 (35.41) | 17 – 25 (21.72) | 0.257 (.061) |
| Asian | 35 | 23 – 53 (36.7) | 17 – 28 (21.25) | 0.282 (.066) (p = 0.07) |
The age range of the Caucasians was adjusted to match the age range of the comparison group. The p values are for comparisons between the ethnic group and Caucasians.
Ethnic dependence of BMI versus fat fraction for females.
| N | Age range (ave) | BMI range (ave) | Ave Fat Fract. (SD) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Caucasian | 129 | 20 – 57 (37.4) | 22 – 34 (25.42) | 0.321 (0.071) |
| Black | 95 | 20 – 52 (37.8) | 20 – 34 (26.57) | 0.328 (0.074) (NS) |
| Hispanic | 37 | 20 – 60 (36.1) | 20 – 34 (25.40) | 0.311 (0.09) (NS) |
| Puerto Rican | 41 | 20 – 52 (35.7) | 20 – 30 (26.18) | 0.348 (0.058) (p < .05) |
| Caucasian | 153 | 23 – 53 (35.41) | 17 – 25 (21.72) | 0.257 (.061) |
| Asian | 35 | 23 – 53 (36.7) | 17 – 28 (21.25) | 0.282 (.066) (p = 0.07) |
The age range of the Caucasians was adjusted to match the age range of the comparison group. The p values are for comparisons between the ethnic group and Caucasians.
Comparison of linear (eq. (16)) and non-linear (eq. (9)) regression expressions for predicting body fat fraction from BMI and age.
| Subjects | ± Age | Linear | Non-linear Model I | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| a | b | c | MSR | BMI0 | f1 | c | MSR | ||
| Male Caucasians | No | -.166 | .0141 | ---- | 0.00404 | 17.20 | .624 | ---- | .00409 |
| Yes | -.218 | .0129 | .00207 | 0.00263 | 19.15 | .500 | .00194 | .00287 | |
| Male Caucasian +Hispanic+Black | No | -.145 | .0134 | ----- | .00380 | 16.71 | .594 | ---- | .00385 |
| Yes | -.206 | .0127 | .00182 | 0.00270 | 18.73 | .496 | .00172 | .00288 | |
| Male Asian | Yes | -.156 | .0126 | .00169 | 0.00201 | 15.72 | .438 | .00169 | .00212 |
| Male Puerto Rican | Yes | -.155 | .0119 | .00163 | 0.00189 | 17.84 | .536 | .00150 | .00188 |
| Female Caucasian | No | 0.0409 | .0113 | ----- | 0.00391 | 13.50 | .739 | ----- | .00314 |
| Yes | -.0240 | .0104 | .00186 | 0.00281 | 14.39 | .635 | .00151 | .00244 | |
| Female Caucasian +Hispanic+Black | No | 0.0494 | .0109 | ------ | .00351 | 13.50 | .728 | ----- | .00276 |
| Yes | -.0160 | .0104 | .00169 | 0.00260 | 14.37 | .642 | .00132 | .00222 | |
| Female Asian | Yes | -.0903 | .0153 | .00122 | 0.00137 | 12.38 | .573 | .00122 | .00140 |
| Female Puerto Rican | Yes | 0.0718 | .00919 | .000947 | .00159 | 12.82 | .639 | .000737 | .00142 |
The regression parameters (either a, b and c; or BMI0, f1 and c) and the mean square residual error (MSR) for the different ethnic groups are listed.
Prediction of fat fraction from BMI for Caucasian + Black + Hispanic subjects.
| Subjects | Linear | Model I | Model II | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| a | b | MSR | f1 | BMI0 | MSR | f1 | f0 | BMI0 | MSR | |
| Male: 18 – 89 | -.145 | .0134 | .0038 | .594 | 16.71 | 0.00385 | .647 | .129 | 22.00 | 0.00377 |
| Male: 18 – 31 | -.201 | .0134 | .00273 | .543 | 19.39 | 0.00315 | .706 | .118 | 23.78 | 0.00261 |
| Male: 32 – 50 | -.133 | .0119 | .00303 | .505 | 16.54 | 0.00312 | .619 | .153 | 23.54 | 0.00281 |
| Male: 51 – 89 | -.126 | .0136 | .00310 | .628 | 16.28 | .00299 | .661 | .167 | 21.43 | 0.00283 |
| Female: 18 – 90 | +.0494 | .0109 | .00351 | .728 | 13.50 | .00276 | .745 | .220 | 19.65 | 0.00272 |
| Female: 18 – 31 | -.00685 | .0116 | .00237 | .695 | 13.99 | .00225 | .774 | .214 | 21.30 | 0.00181 |
| Female: 32 – 50 | +0.0700 | .00963 | .00306 | .723 | 13.86 | .00212 | .737 | .208 | 19.71 | 0.00209 |
| Female: 51 – 90 | +0.106 | .0101 | .00225 | .681 | 11.57 | .00210 | .682 | .249 | 18.28 | 0.00210 |
Model parameters and mean square residual error (MSR) for Model I, Model II and Linear fit are listed.
Prediction of fat fraction from body density for Caucasian + Black + Hispanic subjects.
| Subjects | a | b | f0 | f1 | d0 | d1 | MSRls | MSRsiri1 | MSRsiri2 | MSRbro |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male: 18 – 89 | 4.63 | 4.208 | 0.129 | 0.647 | 1.0678 | 0.954 | .000481 | .000693 | .000711 | 0.000553 |
| Male: 18 – 31 | 4.912 | 4.475 | 0.118 | 0.706 | 1.0695 | 0.948 | .000402 | .000536 | .000597 | 0.000532 |
| Male: 32 – 50 | 4.559 | 4.141 | 0.153 | 0.619 | 1.061 | 0.958 | .000457 | .000723 | .000614 | .000562 |
| Male: 51 – 89 | 4.231 | 3.821 | 0.167 | 0.661 | 1.0612 | 0.944 | .000516 | .000853 | .000957 | .000568 |
| Female: 18 – 90 | 4.673 | 4.239 | 0.220 | 0.745 | 1.048 | 0.9376 | .000640 | .000813 | .00202 | .000662 |
| Female: 18 – 31 | 4.779 | 4.339 | 0.214 | 0.774 | 1.050 | .935 | .000616 | .00066 | .00178 | .000661 |
| Female: 32 – 50 | 4.785 | 4.347 | 0.208 | 0.737 | 1.050 | .941 | .000538 | .000653 | .00191 | .000576 |
| Female: 51 – 90 | 4.606 | 4.175 | 0.249 | 0.682 | 1.041 | .948 | .000722 | .00102 | .00223 | .000732 |
The parameters a and b are the optimal least square values (fat fraction = a/density – b), and f0 and f1 are the fat fractions used for the determination of d0 and d1 from the values of a and b. The mean square residual error for the least square fit (MSRls), the Siri Model I (MSRsiri1, eq. (13)) and Model II (MSRsiri2, eq. (14)) and the Brozek model (MSRbro, eq. (10)) are also listed.